Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cut back farm subsidies
The News-Sentinel (Fort Wayne) ^ | 10. February 2005 | Leo Morris

Posted on 02/14/2005 7:43:05 AM PST by 1rudeboy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: 1rudeboy

here's an interesting article i found posted at a ag forum i read at. it's about the success of getting rid of gvt subsidies, in of all places - New Zealand.


http://www.agritech.org.nz/subsidy.shtml

Subsidy-free and profitable agriculture

Farmers in most countries continue to face radical change, through the reduction or elimination of government subsidies, driven by the need to reform world trade within agricultural products. Farmers fear for the future of those who work on the land, their families, and for the rural communities. They fear the long-term destruction of the traditional farming systems and the rural way of life.

Yet the truth is quite different, and for family farming there is life after subsidies. Indeed, life after subsidies is better than farming that is dependent upon state handouts.

(continued at link)


21 posted on 02/14/2005 8:59:57 AM PST by sdpatriot ("If I know the answer I'll tell you the answer, and if I don't, I'll just respond, cleverly." Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curlewbird

Basically you would end up with vertical integration on a scale much closer to the defunct USSR than would be comfortable for me. I can buy corn right now if I want to, but take away CBOT and then ADM or Cargill will tell you what they want to pay. I would wager if that you took the lean hog contract from the board then the pork industry would be top to bottom with a few industrial corps squeezing what little life is left of the independent producer.


22 posted on 02/14/2005 9:01:48 AM PST by junta (If you must hate, hate an ideologue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dave Olson

The land will still be there the banks that loaned the money won't be that was my point.


23 posted on 02/14/2005 9:04:11 AM PST by junta (If you must hate, hate an ideologue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: curlewbird

Get rid of all the farms and just produce "Soylent Green".

Hey, it worked on the Twilight Zone... "To Serve Man"




24 posted on 02/14/2005 9:05:59 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (60 votes and the world changes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: curlewbird

Consumers shouldn't have a say in the price of crops, they should have a say in the price of the food they purchase from the BIG corporations who really rack up the $$.
________________

Maybe you should buy some stock in those BIG corporations who are racking up all those $$. If you did your homework, however, you would most likely invest your money elsewhere as the food business provides only modest profitability. That's why there is so much consolidation going on within the industry.


25 posted on 02/14/2005 9:25:21 AM PST by Mase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: junta

"ADM or Cargill will tell you what they want to pay"


They already do that! It is called basis!! Right now, our elevator pays us 30 cents under the current CBOT bid. Not all of that goes to the elevator either! When cargil or adm doesn't need grain, they widen out the basis. When they need grain they narrow the basis. They can manipulate the grain out of the farmers hands by tanking the prices and scaring it out of their hands. "It's going down, I had better sell!!" Last year in beans, the basis was positive because the supply was so short. As far as the hog market goes, there aren't any independent producers around here any more. They all feed for someone! Tyson owns the local hog pack, as well as a few beef plants here in our state. They shut down about 3 of their beef plants the last month because of 'short supply' they called it, but really it was too high priced cattle! The lamb market isn't traded. It works! I know the CBOT will never be gotten rid of, but when people talk about a free market, it just isn't one unless I can go to my elevator and say, this is what I need for my product!!!! If they don't want to pay me that amount, they don't buy it. If someone can produce it cheaper than me, fine! I go out of business or I figure out a way to produce it cheaper or better.


26 posted on 02/14/2005 9:25:42 AM PST by curlewbird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: curlewbird
But I get really annoyed when I see all these posts about how 'Rich' the farmers are getting at the expense of the taxpayers. The vast majority of us are not 'rich' by any means.

I get annoyed when people blame the CBOT for low crop prices. Please. The brokers are conspiring to keep prices low? Get a supply & demand clue.

I never said the vast majority of farmers are getting rich at the expense of taxpayers, but some are.

We work hard for a living and just want to be able to make a profit at what we love to do. It is hard work for little return.

Well, gains in efficiency and productivity tend to increase production. Increased production tends to reduce prices. I guess we could turn the clock back to 1900 when 40% of the workforce was in agriculture. That might raise your prices and profits.

27 posted on 02/14/2005 9:30:16 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Floyd R Turbo
If speculators have a better deal maybe you should become a speculator.

But he's a farmer. No fair!!

30 posted on 02/14/2005 10:32:17 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot; Willie Green
But Willie Green says subsidies make our sugar cheaper.

You probably should ping him if you're talking about him.

31 posted on 02/17/2005 1:50:20 AM PST by gd124
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gd124
You probably should ping him if you're talking about him.

Gee thanks, mom.

32 posted on 02/17/2005 7:12:28 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: gd124; Toddsterpatriot
But Willie Green says subsidies make our sugar cheaper.

It's true, subsidies DO make our sugar cheaper by assuring that abundant supply always exceeds demand.

However, Toddsterpatriot is a flying monkey who thinks it's "clever" to spin this basic fact of economics inside-out and upside-down until he "logically" comes to the exact opposite conclusion. Then he'll mock the hell out of you when you persist in proving him wrong. Frankly, I have better things to do with my time than waste all day "debating" the jerk, so I'm glad he didn't ping me.

33 posted on 02/17/2005 7:20:41 AM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green; LowCountryJoe; gd124; 1rudeboy
It's true, subsidies DO make our sugar cheaper by assuring that abundant supply always exceeds demand.

Enjoy the Willie logic. American sugar at 3 times the world market price is "cheaper" because of subsidies!!

Maybe someone inhaled too much choo-choo exhaust.

34 posted on 02/17/2005 7:24:58 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Well, in a sense, he's right. Take away the subsidies, and the world price may rise as supply equalizes with demand. But would it rise over the subsidized domestic level? Doubtful.
35 posted on 02/17/2005 7:29:40 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Sure, but he said it made our sugar cheaper. At triple the world price it should be obvious, even to a math major, that he is wrong.
36 posted on 02/17/2005 7:32:41 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: gd124; Toddsterpatriot
LOL! See! What'd I tell ya, gd?!
Now Toddster pinged his butt-buddies.
If you find it entertaining, you can now sit back and watch them stroke each other's erogenous zones as they spam and destroy this thread with idiocy.

Just like I said, I have better things to do.

37 posted on 02/17/2005 7:37:32 AM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Hey train-boy. The thread is about farm subsidies and it was posted by 1rudeboy. And what better way to talk about subsidies than to rip apart your Willie logic?
38 posted on 02/17/2005 7:44:20 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
If you find it entertaining, you can now sit back and watch them stroke each other's erogenous zones as they spam and destroy this thread with idiocy.

Nope, don't see it happening here. Another "theory" of yours? LOL

39 posted on 02/17/2005 7:49:45 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson