[hedgetrimmer]

the farmers will riot in the fields, calling such a thing "unfair".

I really take exception to this statement. In Korea and in France they are rioting, for two different reasons. For some reason the globalists want to tar American farmers, the only reason I can think of is because farmers are landowners in this country, and the globalists want to centralize ownership and control of all land.

Many of the groups advocating CRPs are not farmers at all, but socialists and communists who don't believe in land ownership. When they can force land to be removed from production to "protect it" or to "preserve species" or whatever, the underlying goal is to take decisions away from the landowner about how the land is to be used. Now our own government goes to these farmers and dangles the money in front of them because of pressure from home grown land trusts or pressure from foreign governments and the WTO. If we were to restore property rights to landowner(farmers) in this country, we'd see that they would use land for marketable crops-- they don't want their land idle. So why don't you all help us to get these other groups, countries and global institutions to butt out?

[GotDangGenius]

Hedge,

The globalists and NGO's are not "behind" farm subsidies- AMERICAN FARMERS are behind farm subsisidies. Because without them, farmers would be forced to produce, grow things, etc., and with the efficiency of the US farmer, there would be an absolute glut of food on the market if everyone used their land to its potential- which in turn would lower prices, but it would put farmers out of business, and eventually the land trusts would indeed begin to purchase the land from farmers at cut-rate prices because farmers would go out of business.

The problem is that sooner or later that is exactly what will happen. What should occur to STOP that from happening is for farm subsidies to be phased out with various programs that provide an incentive for farmers to sell their land to NON-Land Trust orgs.

Saying that the WTO, Land Trusts, and NGO's are behind US farm subsidies is like saying Hillary Clinton wants Americans to vote Republican in 2006.

By the way, you were concerned about consumers in your earlier posts. With Farm subsidies, it hurts the consumer. With lumber subsidies in Cananda it punishes the more efficient American mills. I don't understand where you're coming from anymore? Do you want taxpayers to get the bill for lower priced lumber from Cananda, or pay the market rate without gov't interference and let the most efficient producer win?