U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2019, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
25,287 posts, read 18,740,903 times
Reputation: 29858

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I’m trying to understand the argument for supporting farm subsidies. If I do something for a living and I’m not profitable, I go out of business. Why is agriculture singled out as being immune from capitalism?

I don’t understand why I should subsidize “healthy food”. I want to know what’s in the food I buy. I can then choose to spend as I please if the food grown without Monsanto chemicals is more expensive.
The reason is largely a matter of smoothing out the farm business cycle so you still have enough farms after a bust year.

This spring was exceptionally wet in farm country, with corn and soybeans often being planted weeks after it should have been. Harvest was delayed and is also far behind where it should be this time of year.

https://www.agriculture.com/news/cro...over-usda-says

If tons of farms fail, it's going to be difficult to find any new entrants into the market due to the boom and bust nature of farming. This year was bad, but conditions might improve next year, and you want to have any farmers to meet demand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2019, 08:17 AM
 
4,387 posts, read 2,008,726 times
Reputation: 4313
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I’m trying to understand the argument for supporting farm subsidies. If I do something for a living and I’m not profitable, I go out of business. Why is agriculture singled out as being immune from capitalism?

I don’t understand why I should subsidize “healthy food”. I want to know what’s in the food I buy. I can then choose to spend as I please if the food grown without Monsanto chemicals is more expensive.
Because their product is FOOD.

We grow too much. But do you really want the opposite?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
7,694 posts, read 4,461,667 times
Reputation: 19668
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I’m trying to understand the argument for supporting farm subsidies. If I do something for a living and I’m not profitable, I go out of business. Why is agriculture singled out as being immune from capitalism?
Do you want the US food supply to come under the control of potentially hostile foreign powers? Pure, unfettered capitalism would have no problems allowing that to happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 09:48 AM
 
15,229 posts, read 8,175,783 times
Reputation: 27530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aredhel View Post
Do you want the US food supply to come under the control of potentially hostile foreign powers? Pure, unfettered capitalism would have no problems allowing that to happen.
What does that have to do with AG subsidies? You can require US ownership of farmland. Doesn’t cost the government a dime.

I’m fine with making cheap loans available to smooth out the down years. I’ve seen no justification for subsidies other than some emo “but it’s food” thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 12:59 PM
 
4,387 posts, read 2,008,726 times
Reputation: 4313
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
What does that have to do with AG subsidies? You can require US ownership of farmland. Doesn’t cost the government a dime.

I’m fine with making cheap loans available to smooth out the down years. I’ve seen no justification for subsidies other than some emo “but it’s food” thing.
Another post from fantasy land. ^^^
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 01:40 PM
 
7,008 posts, read 6,788,113 times
Reputation: 3290
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris View Post
They're also highly capital intensive - and have high expenses and debt to service. Most farms operate on really razor thin margins - and events such as bad harvests, sudden drops in prices due to oversupply, and other events can also put a world of hurt on them.
If food producers have such razor thin margins, what business (other than banking for obvious reasons) does not have even thinner. At the end of the day everyone works so they can buy what the farmer is selling. If someone can afford $xxx.xx in video games surely they can spend that same amount or more on food.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
True... the USA is a great 'opportunity' for the diligent and the crooks and politicians.

Successful Foreign countries are generally far more 'strategic' in policy for the best benefit of their nation and residents. Starts with what programs they support in HC and EDU and prepare their skillsets and resources to support. (You will note Singapore announced their 'country specific' AI initiatives this week, they will be as beneficial to the nation as has their previous purposed initiatives in Finance, Trade, Manufacturing, Health Care... )

NZ health ministry supports Menz Sheds, which would be a very good model for a USA farmer support structure. (mental and physical health). NZ also has a very unique AG role (much more sustainable than USA, of course very small scale as well)

Strategic countries will continue to prosper in a healthy manner, as long as corruption and selfishness does not become prevalent. (i.e. USA lobbyists and one term politicians)
That is very socialist of them. Basically these countries are centrally planning the direction of their country. One would then think the most extreme version being communism ought to be even more successful with these kinds of initiatives. They have absolute control. It is really just a matter of making the right choices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post

I don’t understand why I should subsidize “healthy food”. I want to know what’s in the food I buy. I can then choose to spend as I please if the food grown without Monsanto chemicals is more expensive.
If you want healthy foods only, regulations can always be put in place to ensure. Companies like Monsanto, or junk food companies not matter. They still have to follow regulations and adjust business practices accordingly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post

This extreme capitalism is what will destroy our culture. The base of Maslow's hierarchy was never met to be commoditized to this extent. Certian things should simply be available at a fixed low subsidized price (food, basic shelter, basic medicines, UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, etc) in a first world industrialized nation, period. We have attached a "free market" price tag to everything now. We would charge for air if we could, its sick.

If you want to sell a nintnedo switch or whatever free market away.
For those that cannot afford food they can get food stamps. So if we already subsidize consumers, why we need to subsidize vendors too? If we subsidize both sides, why not just be communists? Or at least only subsidize the very very poor farms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
The reason is largely a matter of smoothing out the farm business cycle so you still have enough farms after a bust year.

This spring was exceptionally wet in farm country, with corn and soybeans often being planted weeks after it should have been. Harvest was delayed and is also far behind where it should be this time of year.

https://www.agriculture.com/news/cro...over-usda-says

If tons of farms fail, it's going to be difficult to find any new entrants into the market due to the boom and bust nature of farming. This year was bad, but conditions might improve next year, and you want to have any farmers to meet demand.
Why not just have some kind of private insurance cover bust years? Or even if there is a bust for certain crops or a delay as you say, the consumer can just eat something else, that hopefully is produced somewhere else not affected by some adverse climate.

How far can Food producing bust? As long as there are people in this country that need to eat, and have money or a govt exists to give out welfare, and as long as the farmland is not destroyed, or adverse climate change ruins it, farms should be able to survive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
25,287 posts, read 18,740,903 times
Reputation: 29858
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Why not just have some kind of private insurance cover bust years? Or even if there is a bust for certain crops or a delay as you say, the consumer can just eat something else, that hopefully is produced somewhere else not affected by some adverse climate.

How far can Food producing bust? As long as there are people in this country that need to eat, and have money or a govt exists to give out welfare, and as long as the farmland is not destroyed, or adverse climate change ruins it, farms should be able to survive.
Look at current trade policy. Not only are farmers dealing with adverse weather and the usual farming ups/downs (which are just going to get more extreme with climate change), they're also dealing with trade policies that are making it cost prohibitive to do business with some of their biggest customers.

A lot of American farm production goes overseas. It's not all sold domestically. Are farms even insurable in the private market when the government is working against their customer base?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 09:03 PM
 
7,008 posts, read 6,788,113 times
Reputation: 3290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
Look at current trade policy. Not only are farmers dealing with adverse weather and the usual farming ups/downs (which are just going to get more extreme with climate change), they're also dealing with trade policies that are making it cost prohibitive to do business with some of their biggest customers.

A lot of American farm production goes overseas. It's not all sold domestically. Are farms even insurable in the private market when the government is working against their customer base?
Govt should only give out welfare to farms to ensure our own domestic food supply. If certain farmers A through L are heavily dependent on the foreign market, then politics is a risk they are taking. Perhaps they need to diversify their foreign market base. Sell to India, or Russia, or another country with big populations, or multiple.

It may even be better to let some farms fail. Let the land sit idle for a bit. Let the soil build back up again. We already ruined much farmland by mono-cropping. Idling for a bit will also drop price of land and other associated costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2019, 04:35 PM
 
4,387 posts, read 2,008,726 times
Reputation: 4313
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Govt should only give out welfare to farms to ensure our own domestic food supply. If certain farmers A through L are heavily dependent on the foreign market, then politics is a risk they are taking. Perhaps they need to diversify their foreign market base. Sell to India, or Russia, or another country with big populations, or multiple.

It may even be better to let some farms fail. Let the land sit idle for a bit. Let the soil build back up again. We already ruined much farmland by mono-cropping. Idling for a bit will also drop price of land and other associated costs.
I do not like the way things are now, but it is not in the power of joe farmer to change any of this.

Hey Beth, I think I'm going to diversify my foreign market base this year. I'm gonna call India and Russia, would you get their numbers out of the Rolodex hun?

Are you serious?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2019, 05:08 PM
 
Location: Raleigh
8,823 posts, read 6,607,743 times
Reputation: 12397
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Its mostly machines, or poor illegals doing the hard work though, not the owners.
Machines that cost $500,000+


But the subsidies been around for a long time. They are quite substantial too. Or are you saying none of the subsidies have ever been remitted?



True, but this industry is being subsidized by what is seemingly a lot of money. Plus, they are growing food. If that is not stable enough industry or an enough of an in-demand product, than what else is? You think farms be last to go in any economy since what is the point of an economy other than to eventually buy food.
They’re subsidized to make sure that our food prices remain stable and cheap

In the last several years, farm land hit crazy stupid highs, $8700 an acre in Iowa as an example a few years ago. It’s fallen 17% or so. There were a few things at play that spiked the land values. The government subsidized/pushed ethanol, which drove up corn prices. China was buying a lot of our soybeans. Then you have weather; if Brazil has a drought crop prices go up.

If the rest of the world does well, we see some retaliatory tariffs, then a farm on the edge is looking hard at a bankruptcy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top