Posted on 02/25/2008 5:08:27 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
Because the farmers are voluntarily staying out.
Why would they stay out? I thought it was free money.
I know you think that, it has blinded you to the reality of the situation. Like all government programs, nothing is free, the money comes with an enormous chain.
Briefly, in order to qualify for the money you must agree to stay poor.
Like the guys who live off Central Park? Those millionaires who get payments?
There are always exceptions to the rule, but those guys are also critical to the success of the programs.
To see who is producing our food, drive through farm country, the midwest, the south.
You will see real farmers, and you will see real farming towns. There is a reason those town are small, people live there for the simple lifestyle, not the money. There is no money. Just old buildings.
All of those towns are poor, just like the farmers.
Yeah, farmers are great people. I just don’t want to give them my tax dollars for programs that don’t work.
Well, you can take satisfaction in that they have to greatly humiliate themselves to qualify.
THAT’s why they are avoiding it this year.
This may help.
You are so focused only on the ethanol subsidies tree that you are unable to see the forest of supply and demand.
Forget the damn ethanol subsidies. I know, I know, but try. Those subsidies just happen to be the trigger.
That price increase trigger could have been any one of dozens of things.
Just imagine something; instead of ethanol lets use a trigger that farmers have been denied for decades. Lets just use world demand for our farm products as the triggering factor. That’s one that the American farmers have struggled for years to develop, only to be cut off at the knees time and again.
I myself, along with most farmers, lost thousands and thousands back in the 70’s when US crop exports to Russia where suddenly cut off . Existing delivery contracts were canceled by our government, and crop prices plummeted overnight, leaving us with crops that were worth 25 to 75 cent a bushel LESS than they were at 3 pm the day before. When there are several 30,000 bushel bins full at stake it hurts. This was done in response to a short US crop.
So, if the world demand allows farmers to export as much of their crops as they can grow, domestic food is going to have to compete directly with China etc.
As a result of that increased demand, the resulting com petition will drive prices up. In this example, prices will rise to the point that farmers will voluntarily leave the government programs. In other words, they will rise to where they are today.
Production levels will be where they are today.
Food prices will also be where they are today.
There would be no government programs.
Yeah, right. LOL!
So now you're against them, because they're humiliating?
Yeah, you’re right to laugh.I should have said that it’s the source of that humiliation that is the reason.
By signing up, they have to agree that they won’t make too much money. They have to condem themselves and their families to poverty for another year.
And the milk compacts. And the sugar quotas and price supports. And all the other price supports. And payments to not grow. And payments to grow. And the wasteful bureaucracy that grew to send the checks and file the paperwork.
that you are unable to see the forest of supply and demand.
I love supply and demand. We should try it for agricultural products.
I myself, along with most farmers, lost thousands and thousands back in the 70’s when US crop exports to Russia where suddenly cut off . Existing delivery contracts were canceled by our government,
That's terrible. Like I said before, I'm against government interference in markets.
So, if the world demand allows farmers to export as much of their crops as they can grow, domestic food is going to have to compete directly with China etc.
If all the government programs were ended, I'd be happy to allow world supply and demand determine food prices.
As a result of that increased demand, the resulting competition will drive prices up.
Or drive prices down.
In this example, prices will rise to the point that farmers will voluntarily leave the government programs.
So, the cheap food programs only keep food cheap when it's already cheap? At the cost of billions in tax dollars. When food is expensive, the programs don't keep food cheap? So much for your claim that they lower prices. LOL!
There would be no government programs.
I wish.
Right. Like the farmers in Manhattan who have to agree not to make too much.
If they make too much, they can give the money back.
OK, now that I’ve outlined a path to plentiful food without the governement, it’s your turn.
Make a path.
Your path is higher prices so farmers don't need to take humiliating government handouts?
Make a path.
My path is farmers grow what they want. Or don't grow what they don't want. If they can make money at it, great. If they can't, great.
If they make money, they should expand production. If they can't make money, they should reduce their production or go out of business.
If ethanol makes economic sense, corn farmers (or whatever crop)should grow crops to produce it. Without government mandates, without government handouts, without blending credits.
I asked for a path, not just a beginning and end.
Get the government out of it. Prices will rise and fall according to supply and demand. Sound good to you?
We can’t even farm right any more.
what is this country coming to.
we are going to be right there with zimbabwe?
The government out, yes. I’ve illustrated how much the government cost me in just one 24 hour period. I have no love for those pencil pushers who regularly issue
price depressing crop reports and kill otherwise legit deals with behind the scenes regulations.
Now flesh it our a bit.
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.