Congress Looking to Create Possible Multi-Billion Dollar Farm Subsidy
- Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:49am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Farm-state lawmakers are moving to create a whole new subsidy that would protect farmers when their revenue drops – an unprecedented program that critics say could pay billions of dollars to farmers now enjoying record-high crop prices.
The subsidy, free insurance that would cover farmers’ “shallow crop losses” before their paid insurance kicks in, has been pushed by corn and soybean farmers who could benefit the most from the program. It would replace for the most part several other subsidy programs, including direct payments preferred by Southern rice and cotton farmers. Growers get the direct payments regardless of crop yields or prices. They don’t even have to farm.
The income insurance plan has a diverse group of opponents – environmental groups that have long argued against farm subsidies, conservatives who say the plan won‘t save the government much and even one of the nation’s largest farm groups. The American Farm Bureau Federation says the beefed-up insurance could encourage farmers to make riskier decisions and drive up the price of land.
Top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate Agriculture Committees are looking at folding the new subsidy into a farm bill proposal they are quietly crafting as part of their charge by the deficit-cutting congressional supercommittee to cut farm spending.
The four lawmakers – Senate Agriculture Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich.; Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas; House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla. and Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn. – have said they will shave $23 billion from farm and food aid programs over the next decade. The new revenue insurance program would be considered part of their effort to achieve that goal.
The committee leaders have not yet released the proposal. It is unclear just how the revenue insurance will be crafted and what effort will be made to control its costs. Critics fear a worst-case scenario that would use current, record-high crop prices as a baseline for average revenue. Farmers who suffer minor revenue losses in future years could get major payouts, which could eat up some of the $23 billion in promised savings.
Federally subsidized crop insurance programs are now costing taxpayers $7 billion to $8 billion despite the biggest farm profits in nearly four decades. The Agriculture Department predicts net farm income by the end of this year till total $103.6 billion, a rise of 31 percent from 2010. The department says this is the highest value since 1974, adjusted for inflation.
Replacing the direct payments seems inevitable. Critics have singled them out and even farm groups now say they are politically indefensible. But critics of the new income insurance subsidy say it could create new problems for taxpayers and farmers alike.
“The only rationale for a new federal revenue guarantee program on top of existing revenue insurance programs is that it seems politically easier to defend than direct payments,” said Bruce Babcock, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University. Babcock released a report last week calling revenue insurance a “boondoggle.” The report was commissioned by the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy group that has long opposed federal farm subsidies.
Agriculture committee leaders argue that the revenue insurance plan makes sense because farmers would receive payments when prices fall or their crops are destroyed, unlike direct payments which are paid in good times and bad.
“We‘ve got to move away from paying people when they don’t need it,” Peterson said amidst negotiations last week. “In this fiscal climate you can’t justify it.”
He said negotiators are still working on some of the problems raised by critics, including the potential that the revenue insurance could overpay farmers in good times. He said the lawmakers may end up proposing different programs for different crops.
Peterson maintains that subsidies are still needed to manage risks.
“We are hoping to keep stability in agriculture so their food prices don’t double,” he said. “We’re trying to make sure the United States produces the cheapest food.”
The “shallow loss” insurance programs could begin paying out once a farmer’s revenue falls by as little as 5 or 10 percent. Federally subsidized crop insurance, for which farmers pay premiums, would kick in with deeper losses.
Agricultural economist Babcock and the Farm Bureau both say insurance should only kick in when a farmer has major losses.
Wisconsin Rep. Ron Kind, a Democrat who unsuccessfully led efforts to reduce farm subsidies during debate over the last farm bill four years ago, said he is concerned that those who want to see subsidies scaled back will be shut out of the process.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 676 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 527 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 400 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 372 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 328 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 266 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 275 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 149 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 266 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (87)
VISITORNUMBER3
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:58amQuote: “are looking at folding the new subsidy into a farm bill proposal they are quietly crafting”
This should be illegal…it happens all the time and it should be illegal. A bill that can‘t stand scrutiny on it’s own, shouldn’t be passed. Period.
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:15amAgreed!
Report Post »NO YOU CANT
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:19amThe Federal gov has become a Socialist machine. What created this? The Federal income tax. It is actually called “The Progressive Income Tax”.
Report Post »With taxes, they penalize
With money, they corrupt
With welfare, they decieve
With debt, they enslave.
All the while, centralizing power…
mils
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:31amThere needs to be a law…allllllll bills need to be put up for public viewing before being passed..
But we know it won’t happen.
It seems to do little good to talk.
.politicians do as they please, and people keep re electing them without bothering to see what they are up to.
ROMANTIC POET SAID
BUT……Regulations have to be removed. Obama and his minions have been trying to strangle farmers that DO PRODUCE.
Farmers can become more self-sustainable from QUANTITY sold vs. importing from other countries for our food sources.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/DataFeature/
Report Post »***********************************************************************************
HE THAT CONTROLS THE MILITARY AND THE FOOD SOURCES..CONTROL THE PEOPLE..
Ruler4You
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:38amCongressmen (and women) are running low on ‘discretionary’ funds these days. A way to get some of that (obama) money into their own pockets is right on schedule before the election.
It‘s not that we don’t already HEAVILY subsidize farming. We do. But with government struggling to get FULL control of Americans behavior, it will need to control all food resources and everything that might fall under the “interstate commerce clause” of the Constitution. That way, ANY interaction with that “system” (like the IRS) implies that you ‘grant jurisdiction’ to government oversight. You have to eat. That is interaction. You submit. Sounds a lot like islam, ‘eh?
Report Post »JRook
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 4:33pm@NO YOU CANT Oh ok, have another round. Who do you think the money is going to. Military contractors, big pharma, large engineering firms, health care organizations, physicians, big oil, etc. You don‘t think the food industry doesn’t lobby for increases in food stamps. Right questions, wrong answer. Follow the money….the wealthy and big corporations are the government. The tax system is just another mechanism for collecting and concentrating the wealth.
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:48amCronyism in full swing: Cronyism exposed click on: http://commonsense21c.com/CRONYISM.html
Report Post »Another offer or security and unearned income in exchange for our freedom and prosperity:
grayling646
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:41amYou forgot to put a period at the end of your sentence.
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:38amAre these the mega farmers or the mom and pop farmers?
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:49amEvery time the jerks in Congress have a chance to actually CUT SPENDING, they vote it down!
Report Post »They say they want to create a climate for job growth, then pass ANOTHER so-called “Free” trade agreement.
The leadership, and a majority of the members are ruling against the will & betterment of the people.
DRAIN THE SWAMP!
grayling646
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:51amThe story said some of them don’t even have farms. I suppose those would be called freeloaders.
Report Post »SgtB
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:19amDoes it matter? This is taxpayer dollars going to pay for the private losses of individuals or corporations. It is nothing more than legalized theft. We already pay farmers to let land go fallow and now they want us to pay them when they don’t get paid enough?
If the federal gov’t would stop regulating food prices and crop production rates, we wouldn’t have all this crap in the first place. Do some research on the Wickard v. Filburn case of the US Supreme Court if you doubt that gov’t believes it controls the food market.
Report Post »rabblechat
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:18amGovernment needs to quit picking winners and losers, by manipulating prices through these kind of subsidies.
Report Post »You may say we need plenty of cheap food, well I have news for ya, more of the corn we produce in the U.S.A. ends up in you gas tanks than on your plate. If we got away from ethanol we could reduce our need for higher and higher yields substantially.
As for price; subsidies do not reduce the price of corn or beans, they simply shift a portion of cost to the government, who then recoups that cost from us via tax.
If we let the market dictate, we would see a return to smaller scale agriculture, which would employ more people than industrial Ag. and reduce the tax burden.
SamIamTwo
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:35amGovernment meaning those who run the gov no doubt. And all the time I thought we had some conservative REPS in Congress…
When are they going to start screaming and shouting on the floor? Sick and tired of the old republicans being nice and polite…it’s time to yelling at rooftops about the insanity of it all.
Report Post »thebabyguy
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:12amWe need a simple new system for taxpayers. We need names and how they voted on all bills – especially BS ones like this. We MUST hold all of these miscreants in Congress accountable. You vote for bills like this that suck money out of our pockets, you will NOT return to office in the next election cycle. Doesn’t matter if they have a D, R or I after their names. If necessary, we must put folks up for a runoff form the same party. This must stop. That’s why we are in the hole so bad.
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:36amYou can get the names and how the voted on the congress web site.
Report Post »dnewton
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:14pmHow do you handle the situation back when Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the house and balanced the budget but at the same time, a new credit based safety net was crafted called Fannie and Freddie? The problem is risk that was inched up every year or every presidency, including Bush43 as they were required to write bad loans. The government is slowly becoming a poorly operated insurance company. We are insuring against every risk, war, nuclear meltdown, floods, hurricanes business failures, college collapse, and we are even trying to save the planet. The fact that there is no private sector providing this insurance proves that there is no market for it except the market created at the ballot box. Eventually the government will try to modify the risk by regulating who can plant what and how they can fertilize it. A percentage of it will probably have to be switch grass for alternative fuels. If they want to play insurance company, they should be made to collect premiums like everyone else.
Report Post »dirtfarmer63
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:08amHere is the thing. Most of us real farmers really want nothing to do with farm subsidies. But in a very competitive industry not taking them would mean being overrun by those who do. If they want to take away all subsidies I would be fine with that, but it will never happen. Why, government control. In order to receive your paltry farm payment you must first, certify how many acres of what you planted and where. how many acres and bushels you harvest and where you hauled it. Give them you IRS information, as well as let them tell you if you can or cant make a piece of land more productive by digging a drainage ditch or tiling it. You see if the government gets out of farming then who would hold back production. The Farmers would overproduce and food prices would be terribly cheap. I guess they think that’s a bad thing.
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:22amIt sounds to me like the government is trying to encourage people to buy up farm land and then NOT plant on it. It said you get money even if you don’t put a crop in the ground. This is another way to break the backs of farmers and make sure we become a 3rd world.
Report Post »Rajabear1
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:42amdirtfarmer63- thanks for that input. I always wonder what ‘real’ farmers think and how this all effects them whenever this subject comes up. I think it SUCKS that the government has embedded itself so deep with what should be one of the most honorable ways to make a living. I am sorry that you are put in a bad spot. Over the last few years I started to understand what the farm sub really are, I was sicked to see how much the gov can manipulate the food markets. Get rid of the subsidies and the bogus regulations and we would be entirely self sufficient and the farmers would be able to earn the money they work so hard for. Paying people not to produce crops? Crazy.
Report Post »cntrlfrk
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:07am‘
We need to keep government out of business, when our government, and tax dollars are so entwined paying subsidies to businesses that would otherwise not be profitable, they are simply laundering money and buying votes.
.
Report Post »Exrepublisheep
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:21amExactly that.
Report Post »Bill Rowland
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 3:07pmHey Mr Government Man, I have some land that I don’t want to grow corn on, will you please sign me up? Oh, buy the way, I don’t want to grow pigs either so will you pay me more for not growing the corn to not feed to the pigs I am not going to grow?
OMG
Report Post »PABlackie
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:05amHey Romantic, farmers do buy their own insurance, when they can afford it, or as many do, go without it. Take away the subsidies and then take away all the regulations and controls so they can sell the product for what it costs them to produce. Then also watch the food prices soar.
Report Post »chaparra72
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:20amYou are a fool if you think stopping the subsidies would be a bad thing, and that it would cause food prices to “soar”, as you put it. How do you think these farmers receive these subsidies, where is the money coming from? From taxes that we the people pay. DUH! We only think that food is cheap, based on what we see at the checkout stand, but we aren’t adding in the costs of the taxes we pay.
Subsidies need to end, farmers need to be able to charge their own prices for their own products, not be told what they will be paid for it.
Governent and big Ag walk hand in hand, they both depend on eachother. The Government does it for the money, and big Ag does it to be able to call the shots when is comes to rules and regulations, which also leads back to the money.
I am in no way against people/businesses acquiring wealth through their business transactions, but this is corruption.
Report Post »Libertarian
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 6:40pm@PABlackie
You do not understand economics, if the price of tomatoes is too high the market will demand more tomato farmers; likewise if there is an oversupply of tomatoes on the market then the price will be very cheap.
The only reason why food prices would/could increase is because of the Federal Reserve’s impact on the value of our dollar and farm subsidies (government intrusion into the market place). 58% of farm subsidies go to the largest 4 farming operations in this country. Farm subsidies destroy small farmers.
Regulation is the largest destroyer of small business; there are several examples of big business lobbying for tougher regulation. Take Mattel Inc. for example – they were at the epicenter of the toy controversy (lead in paint), 6 recalls from their business alone. They lobbied for tougher regulation and received a waiver from the very people they pleaded with for this regulation. The result was many small American toy manufacturers went bankrupt and Mattell stock and the company flourished.
Report Post »TxGold
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:57amSo, it’s a bad idea to keep farmers, that supply our food sources, in business? Is that so we can depend on other countries for all of our food? Think about it. You have to have a crop to make money, if it doesn‘t rain on dry land farms they can’t make money and may have to sell. I know some larger farm are taking advantage of these programs, but the small family farms may need help through rough times.
Report Post »RidingOnaPig
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:07amNO MORE GOVERNMENT!!!! Oh but the little Children… NO MORE GOVERNMENT!! Oh but the poor little farmer…. NO MORE GOVERNMENT!!
Whether it serves my interest or not. NO MORE!!!!!
Report Post »LJW101
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:20amYes its a bad idea to prop up farmers who cant manage their farm to make it through tough times. Once these guys who farm the government are no longer propped up, they will have to sell out, and a much more effecient producer who can stand on his own will come in and produce bigger crops than the guy who was farming the government.
Report Post »microace
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:55amThe family farm is non-existent any longer, the people who profit from this type of subsidy are the big corporate farms, they already have insurance which is federally backed, so why again are we going to give them this subsidy? I say cut all subsidies and quit enabling these farmers to fail.
Report Post »TxGold
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:58amThat’s not true. There are many family farms in communities all across this country.
Report Post »Dutchracer
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:09amThis is a Huge misconception that people have out their that corporate farms are taking over the family farm and ranch. 98% of all farms & ranches are family owned and operated. Please look it up and you will see that I’m right.
We are a family owed and operated ranch just like a lot of other ones that had to incorporate due to regulations, taxes and risk management because of our government continues reaching into our pocket stealing our livelihoods like the death tax for instance. A lot of farms & ranches are forced to incorporate or form LLC’s, they have no choice. but be assured these corporations like mine are family owned and operated. We Make the decisions, We produce an excellent product the way we want to to serve our costumer, not what any corporate cronies wants period!
As for the payment program, I’m part of a younger generation of producers that say GET RID OF IT and let us do it on our own so that we can save this country! WHERE ARE WE GETTING THIS MONEY FROM? The last time I check we were still 12 Trillion in debt and counting. THIS MUST STOP!
Report Post »The farmer and rancher must take a stand with everyone else and refuse farm payment programs if they want others to quite suckling from the government teat or we look like Hippocrates!
Our ranch does not take one government program and we manage to make it through and we never will because I‘m don’t want the government pulling any of my strings.
Sorry but someone need to say this!
marthasusan40
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:54amWhat another Welfare program, now its for the farmers….this is just another step towards making the good old USA a Socialistic country…………I do not care if it is thousands or billions..we must STOP the spending…Farmers will figure it out all on their own….we all know that this money will go towards the corporate farmers and the little guys won’t see a dime anyway…Support your local farmers markets..this is how you help your local farmers…buy local and buy it often…Wake up America…
Report Post »RidingOnaPig
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:09amYou say this like farmers don’t already have welfare. Huge taxdollars dumped down the hole every year in the name of helping farmers. Kill Welfare…. in ALL forms!.
Report Post »Ashley
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:52amFarmers have been paid to NOT grow corn. And, soon we will be blamed for the food shortages that the World will have. Back in the mid-1980′s, dairy famers where paid to stop producing milk. Entire herds of dairy cattle were slaughtered. The Farm Service Agency arm of the USDA promotes all sorts of “conservation” easements to get farmland out of service, which reeks of Agenda 21. Money is offered to entice farmers to do it. Once the “contract” is signed and money passes to the farmer, the farmer loses control of their land for a period of time specified in the contract. And, land trusts are being promoted to get more rural land completely out of production. Offer the landowner tax breaks, money, and other enticements to make sure the land never becomes productive. All of this is happening in our rural communities and it needs to stop. We need to get our farmland back in production, in order to generate revenue in these areas. The government has controlled these areas for far too long.
Report Post »Christhefarmer
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:02amWhole thing is dumb, this isnt not the free market. Lots of “farmers” around me that dont even own tractors get paid in the 6 figures not to grow x crop… Crop insurance is nice, like this year with the drought in Texas most peoples crops failed. If not for crop insurance 1,000′s of farmers would have went belly up, but not really the governments job. If those farmers would have failed then others could have came in bought their land drilled wells and watered the crops unlike the ones that don’t care if their crops succeed or fail because of the insurance. I am for getting rid of all of it and letting farmers stand on their own two feet.
Report Post »Dutchracer
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:20amAshley is right on the nose!
There is nothing more corrupt than government using a back door approach to control a persons private property and business than the FARM SERVICE AGENCY! Has anyone actually read a CRP or WHIP Contract all the way through?
Report Post »Even if the government runs out of funds to pay you your payment you are still require or mandate to comply with their contract. Would anyone in their right mind sign this? Let Uncle Sam breech his end of the contract and continue to hold my end accountable? Enough is Enough!
LOLReally
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:46amYou recently reported about hedge funds buying up large farms with water acess. Now those large farms want to insure a constant profit flow for the investors to make them more appealing.
Report Post »hauschild
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:38amReally, what the hell is 8 billion when it’s going to a lot of farmers? Talk to me about 1 trillion in stimulus funds that went to probably a lot fewer people.
It’s ridiculous the way we allow Marxists to define the issue, and then we’re reduced to talking about farm subsidies which are paltry.
Want real savings? Abolish at least 50% of government departments, namely the Dept of Education. Now THAT’S a boondoggle.
Report Post »FEARDOM
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:30amWe need this to keep food production but only for the small farm’s.
Report Post »Rickfromillinois
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:29amMost of this money does not go to family farmers but to corporate farms. I have a problem with that but in all honesty I would rather see my money going to subsidize those who grow my food then to some of these pie in the sky “green” industries that produce nothing.
Report Post »freedomweiner
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:26amSUBSIDY = CONTROL= DEBT
[In explaining the "true" nature of banking in the world] The IBBC is a bank. Their objective isn’t to control the conflict, it’s to control the debt that the conflict produces. You see, the real value of a conflict, the true value, is in the debt that it creates. You control the debt, you control everything. You find this upsetting, yes? But this is the very essence of the banking industry, to make us all, whether we be nations or individuals, slaves to debt.
Report Post »mattmo79
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:25amStop it! Stop coming up with new stupid ways to spend our tax dollars! It’s time farmers stand on their own two feet and work within the free market!!
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:29am“Let farmers stand on thier own two feet”
Now that is a novel freaking concept. Only one problem with it. It does not put more Americans on the teat and lead toward a socialist take over.
Report Post »schroeder123
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:23amThis is one reason I think we need a total replacement of these elected and appointed officials.
Report Post »The lack of common sense is staggering. Every acre of land in the use could be farmed as corn and we will still not have enough of telethon to make a difference. NOw we want to tax the people more ! you are out of your mind !
FEARDOM
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:26amWe need it ! !
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:19amYour cries of “need” do not give you the moral sanction to loot my life.
What we actually “need” is a true free market, for all products, but especially agriculture. The entire agriculture boondogle that exists now is solely the creation of government and corrupt farmers back at the turn of the last century. Adding more gasoline to the fire, sir, will not put the fire out.
Report Post »TRILO
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:10amSo we are going to cut spending by adding a new subsidy. Only in Washington can this even be thought of. Just another program to reward the big agriculture lobby.
Report Post »schroeder123
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:20amA men !!!
Report Post »knighttemplar999
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:26amWhat do you mean only in Washington? It’s the rural hick millonaire farmers behind this, they are more corrupt than bankers.
Report Post »UnreconstructedLibertarian
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:25amKnightTemplar999
You might want to read that article again, it says:
“Agricultural economist Babcock and the Farm Bureau both say insurance should only kick in when a farmer has major losses.”
If the Farm Bureau is against this Ag Bill provision – the “rural hick millionaire” farmers are certainly not in favor of this.
This whole proposal is to finish the socialization/collectivisation of agriculture. “shallow loss” means guaranteed income at the behest of taxpayers. Dirtfarmer63 has the situation correctly pegged, the system has disadvantaged farmers who don’t play the game and has caused the extinction of actual “free market” farmers.
Let’s further examine the benefactors of this move? This also sets a floor under the cost of inputs that financially benefit very few mega-corporations who control those inputs.
This whole attempt will do 3 things. 1.) destroy medium and small sized farmers by incentivising the further consolidation of productive via smaller margins per unit of production. 2.) Completely socialize the income of these “collective” farms. 3.) Socialize the profit margins of the input supply companies (who are already consolidated).
The only hope small and mid sized farms had was to deal directly with the consumer and re-create the “free market” system that should have been in place all along. The “Food Safety and Modernization Act” slammed that door shut.
You mean you haven’t noticed how food prices have soared since th
Report Post »big-jeff
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:09amIt’s good to be one of those poor or fake farmers.
Report Post »http://farm.ewg.org/
http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2011/06/city-slickers-continue-to-rake-in-farm-payments/
Dustyluv
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:07amEliminate all subsidies. Let the markets rule again. First, get the Government off out throats! Reulations and subsidies are killing people in ways we can’t even see. While you are at it, end welfare. ship the illegals back to where they came from and put people back to work or let their asses starve.
Only help widows, orphans and the truly sick and truly needy. Drug tests and means testing if you get a dime from tax dollars. You dont want to work…tough f’ing noogies.
Socailism has failed every single time and the free markets are not and never were truly free at all.
Report Post »TxSon
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:04amEvery day seems to bring a new example of Federal over reaching and fiscal abuse. Get rid of all subsidies over the next few years. Let farmers BUY the insurance they need to protect themselves.
We need reprsentatives that have the sense and courage to oppose these corporate welfare boondogles. Unfortunately, my congressman never saw a spending program or liberal idea he didn’t like.
Report Post »drago
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:06am@Txson I agree, your spot on bud!
Report Post »Beansrock
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:33amWow, let the farmers buy their own insurance. What a novel and common sense idea. No wonder all those “smart” people in Washington never thought of that.
Report Post »Romanticpoet
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:38amWe all have to buy auto insurance, house insurance, etc. Make the farmers BUY their own insurance.
If the subsidization stops, then maybe the farmers will plant crops, raise cows, etc. to LOWER food prices.
BUT……Regulations have to be removed. Obama and his minions have been trying to strangle farmers that DO PRODUCE.
Farmers can become more self-sustainable from QUANTITY sold vs. importing from other countries for our food sources.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/DataFeature/
Two of the 10 planks of the Communist manifesto is:
Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.
AND
Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country
http://www.conservativeusa.org/10planksofcommunism.htm
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:00amWe need Food & Energy to exist… and whoever can Control or Limit these… have Power over the People!
Report Post »celestialfire
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:03amMakes one wonder why the subsidy, http://www.trevorloudon.com/2011/06/look-who%e2%80%99s-buying-up-flood-ravaged-farm-land/
Report Post »