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.
There's a general strategy that is being implemented by governments, to hoard people into the cities, and give agricultural land to large corporations for farming. This is implemented via various socio-/economic/political measures and persistent targeted brainwash that farming life is bad/hard/unglamorous and certain portrayals of people who live in rural areas by mass media. One tool used is taxation, various restrictive codes, etc, meant to exlile "poor person" (say, poorer small farmer who's not after large material wealth) and bring second/third/recreational homes of the wealthier population, in certain areas, for example.
Ah the bad government... The same bad government giving great deals on loans to start a farm, buy the land etc. The same bad government that subsidizes ranchers with BLM grazing programs that are run at a loss to the tax payer. All sorts of tax breaks given to farmers, that's a disincentive I suppose.
The reality is that people do their math and choose what they want for themselves. Farming is like any other business - people consider the pros, the cons and profit horizons, the pain or how easy it is to make a living, the risks, the benefits.
The fact that not many people are going into farming tells you that entry into the business is expensive (land, equipment, outlook, risks) and benefits are nothing compared to someone who works in the city in front of a computer all day. It is not the government's fault that someone selling real-estate makes 6% on a sale and one sale can equal a whole year of a small farm's profits, that's capitalism for you. Hell, in the States a 5 acre farmer cannot even get health insurance unless he pays for it himself. When Obama tried to get people to have the chance to buy insurance for themselves, guess who jumped against it? Yes, many, many conservatives among whose ranks are many, many rural farmers...
As for zoning laws - they are LOCAL government, made up of people living LOCALLY. Truth is, many a farm gets chunked up and sold to developers not because of the zoning laws (these get changed later to allow residential development), it is because nobody wants to work the farm anymore and it is easier taking a few $million for a chunk of land and becoming an instant millionaire than actually working for a living.
For those of us who headed to rural America from the military and "gubmint" jobs, some of us didn't go there to farm but instead to seek solitude in our retirements that we did not have living in the angry cities where we had to work for decades. I certainly have no desire to "farm" my small piece of land except for my own family.
Regarding ag subsidies, one of the reasons farmers are subsidized is because they have to export against heavily subsidized markets in socialized countries. This problem is increased as new competitive international markets come on board and as America globalizes.
Personally, I wish all subsidies could end but I'm afraid we're way too far down the road to go back now. There would indeed be a revolution if the end of subsidies was instituted across the board and fairly between urban and rural America. Subsidies for museums, libraries, city streets, highways, crop and animal production would all stop. Right now subsidies across the urban and rural American landscapes are shaped largely by whichever political party happens to be in power except that conservatives tend to be opposed to all subsidies. And since modern Democrats lean more and more toward urban subsidies, the future of subsidies to American agriculture becomes a step-child.
As to complaining, farmers are still Americans and have as much right to complain about their government as anyone else. Referencing derogatory Biblical names serves no one and no argument. Many farmers out here in Texas are conservative and vehemently dislike subsidies yet they still vote for Democrats. These farmers may be perceived as dishonest but they know which party has traditionally supported subsidies. I find myself hardly blaming them.
The issues of Federal subsidies are far from as simplistic as some would like to make them for the sake of mediocre political arguments. Subsidies can be found in MANY more places than the EWG Farm Subsidy database which makes it seem that agriculture is getting all the money.
I will lastly say I get no subsidies, tax exemptions or even high fives from Austin or D.C.
For those of us who headed to rural America from the military and "gubmint" jobs, some of us didn't go there to farm but instead to seek solitude in our retirements that we did not have living in the angry cities where we had to work for decades. I certainly have no desire to "farm" my small piece of land except for my own family.
Yet, some of us did (like Submariner). At least he publicizes that fact. In addition to having the opportunity to retire early on a guaranteed paycheck, while in the military many members get all sorts of benefits that allow them to save a whole lot of money that ordinary civvies do not get. That's the "other" side of that story - it's like living with Mom and Dad and saving the rent money and bill money and all sorts of extra money. Once you strike out on your own - you got a nice little nest saved up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired
Regarding ag subsidies, one of the reasons farmers are subsidized is because they have to export against heavily subsidized markets in socialized countries. This problem is increased as new competitive international markets come on board and as America globalizes.
We are talking about feeding our own here. Many a farmer is wise and finds that it is more lucrative to get subsidized here and produce for a place like Asia and Japan (California, for example). Yet these folks get glorified in the same group as the "hard working small holding farmer who toils to feed the ungrateful city folks". The latter description is all too common on this forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired
Personally, I wish all subsidies could end but I'm afraid we're way too far down the road to go back now. There would indeed be a revolution if the end of subsidies was instituted across the board and fairly between urban and rural America. Subsidies for museums, libraries, city streets, highways, crop and animal production would all stop. Right now subsidies across the urban and rural American landscapes are shaped largely by whichever political party happens to be in power except that conservatives tend to be opposed to all subsidies. And since modern Democrats lean more and more toward urban subsidies, the future of subsidies to American agriculture becomes a step-child.
States have always subsidized things like art or museums or science because a lot of the science and technology, for example, should be in the public domain. For example, the Internet - it would be a pretty crappy world if Time Warner had invented it and owned it out right. Museums? But of course, why stop subsidizing those? Otherwise all the great works of art or science would be in someone's private collection and the rest of us would be left imagining what these things look like. Same with food - it makes perfect sense to subsidize the small farmer - the government should want to have cheap food available to everyone, just like one would think the government would want to have free healthcare available to everyone. I have quite a few friends who are miserable in their jobs and have great ideas of starting their own businesses and start-ups. Do you know what the #1 obstacle is to doing that? Health insurance (or lack thereof). If they were allowed to obtain it cheaply or freely, it would create so many more jobs and companies - hence, not all government subsidies are bad. The problem is when the ag subsidy, for example, covers both you with 5 acres and nothing to your name but the desire to start farming and the ag conglomerate that owns swaths of land and has virtually unlimited resources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired
As to complaining, farmers are still Americans and have as much right to complain about their government as anyone else. Referencing derogatory Biblical names serves no one and no argument.
Eh? What post are you referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired
Many farmers out here in Texas are conservative and vehemently dislike subsidies yet they still vote for Democrats. These farmers may be perceived as dishonest but they know which party has traditionally supported subsidies. I find myself hardly blaming them.
Many farmers also HATE the people in the cities and perceive them as a threat (and many times this perception is well founded esp. when it comes to gentrifying the lands or applying the same laws in the country that make sense in a city but not in the country). There has always been tension between rural and urban. However, fact of the matter is that farming is just another business and people look at it like just another business. As I said, many of them do the math and decide the long days, the hard work, the problems etc. are just not worth it. These days you can sit in a cubicle and make a living and hate every minute of it but it is easier (you get health insurance, get a steady paycheck, you wear nice clothes, get to have a house, a car etc.). You could sit in the dirt every day, pray for rain that doesn't come or for some miracle to clear the garden of the cucumber beetle that is devastating your zucches and all that fun for a profit of $20,000 a year after all expenses - but you still have a wife, a child or two, a mortgage, need for transportation etc. IMHO, the government should help these people - provide free healthcare for them and all sorts of tax subsidies - until they are ready to be profitable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired
The issues of Federal subsidies are far from as simplistic as some would like to make them for the sake of mediocre political arguments. Subsidies can be found in MANY more places than the EWG Farm Subsidy database which makes it seem that agriculture is getting all the money.
I will lastly say I get no subsidies, tax exemptions or even high fives from Austin or D.C.
There's a general strategy that is being implemented by governments, to hoard people into the cities, and give agricultural land to large corporations for farming. This is implemented via various socio-/economic/political measures and persistent targeted brainwash that farming life is bad/hard/unglamorous and certain portrayals of people who live in rural areas by mass media. One tool used is taxation, various restrictive codes, etc, meant to exlile "poor person" (say, poorer small farmer who's not after large material wealth) and bring second/third/recreational homes of the wealthier population, in certain areas, for example.
This nonsense is obviously written by somebody who's never mucked out stalls or hoed row crops in mid-summer heat or tried to load a stubborn heifer into a trailer or done haying by headlights because it's supposed to rain the next day. My guess is that you've never raised anything more than a patio tomato.
I grew up on a farm (well, two, actually), and if anything, the mass media romanticizes farming rather than "brainwashing" the populace about farming. If you had even a smidgen of historical knowledge, you would realize that people were leaving farming long before there was a "mass media" or "large corporations".
Oh, yeah, and before there were "large corporations" farming, there were rich landowners who had serfs, slaves, or peasants to work their land. At least the people who work for corporate farms today are generally paid decent wages ... or they leave for jobs in the cities, too.
This nonsense is obviously written by somebody who's never mucked out stalls or hoed row crops in mid-summer heat or tried to load a stubborn heifer into a trailer or done haying by headlights because it's supposed to rain the next day. My guess is that you've never raised anything more than a patio tomato.
I grew up on a farm (well, two, actually), and if anything, the mass media romanticizes farming rather than "brainwashing" the populace about farming. If you had even a smidgen of historical knowledge, you would realize that people were leaving farming long before there was a "mass media" or "large corporations".
Oh, yeah, and before there were "large corporations" farming, there were rich landowners who had serfs, slaves, or peasants to work their land. At least the people who work for corporate farms today are generally paid decent wages ... or they leave for jobs in the cities, too.
After which, in order to keep food costs low enough to prevent riots, we employ illegal immigrants 'cause no American wants to work for $3.99/hr in the 100 degree heat in the field without benefits and health insurance. Then same American complains about illegal immigrants and demands a border fence 'cause "they are taking our jobs".
Anyways, good post, thanks. I wish I could rep you again.
Well, I'm not going to get into the fray here or the politics of farming or life in America other than to say I happened upon a PBS episode on farming in America. At the end there are urban farmers and farmer's markets filmed in Detroit which I found interesting and informative.
America Revealed: Episode 1: Food Machine
Over the past century, an American industrial revolution has given rise to the biggest, most productive food machine the world has ever known. In this episode, host Yul Kwon explores how this machine feeds nearly 300 million Americans every day. He discovers engineering marvels we’ve created by putting nature to work and takes a look at the costs of our insatiable appetite on our health and environment.
For the first time in human history, less than 2% of the population can feed the other 98%.
He meets the men and women who keep us fed 365 days a year—everyone from industrial to urban farmers, crop dusting pilots to long distance bee truckers, modern day cowboys to the pizza deliveryman.
I could have been happy as a farmer or a farmer's wife, but the reality is that there's so much work for so little profit that not many kids raised on farms are willing to do it when they have alternatives. It's a good life in a lot of ways, but it's not an easy life. Even in Amish communities, many Amishmen work in lumber mills or factories or do carpentry, and only raise a kitchen garden, hay, and some field corn and only keep driving horses and a milk cow along with some chickens and maybe a couple of pigs for butchering in the fall.
It's a lot easier to step into an already prosperous farming situation than it is to try to make an unprofitable farming business turn enough profit to enable a family to prosper. Many farmers these days can only stay in farming because their wives work off the farm as teachers or in county government where they not only get decent wages but also health care and pensions. This is not all that different from the situation that many non-farm mom-and-pop small businesses face, and why so many get gobbled up by corporate entities.
I don't see "urban farming" as really being a viable business enterprise. I can see urban people raising food crops as a part-time endeavor but I just don't see it being able to support a family.
I could have been happy as a farmer or a farmer's wife, but the reality is that there's so much work for so little profit that not many kids raised on farms are willing to do it when they have alternatives. It's a good life in a lot of ways, but it's not an easy life. Even in Amish communities, many Amishmen work in lumber mills or factories or do carpentry, and only raise a kitchen garden, hay, and some field corn and only keep driving horses and a milk cow along with some chickens and maybe a couple of pigs for butchering in the fall.
It's a lot easier to step into an already prosperous farming situation than it is to try to make an unprofitable farming business turn enough profit to enable a family to prosper. Many farmers these days can only stay in farming because their wives work off the farm as teachers or in county government where they not only get decent wages but also health care and pensions. This is not all that different from the situation that many non-farm mom-and-pop small businesses face, and why so many get gobbled up by corporate entities.
I don't see "urban farming" as really being a viable business enterprise. I can see urban people raising food crops as a part-time endeavor but I just don't see it being able to support a family.
Agreed with almost everything you said. In and around (mostly around) a city like Austin, for example, where the "green and sustainable" movement is almost city mandated policy, small farms are popping up on 2-10 acre properties. They are mostly run by former corporate folks who have amassed enough wealth to be able to buy the land and home outright and dabble in the newly found hobby. These folks most often but not always have a working spouse (especially if they have a mortgage to pay on the property). The only reason they can break a profit and make a living is the professionals in town who are willing to pay the prices at the farmers' markets. I know at least one bee farmer who is doing pretty well - it is a 24/7/365 business for them tending to the bees, teaching classes to the public, selling equipment, hives, queens, so on and so on - a full scale operation. However, these folks purchased the property 20+ years ago when it was much cheaper than today, today their property would be virtually inaccessible in terms of cost. I know of another family in the area that supplies flowers for wholesale to a big grocery chain around here, they too got their start with land purchased when land was about 8-10 times cheaper than today. If they were to come in today and purchase 10 acres of land that can be worked in full (no rocks, good soil, no trees etc. - very difficult to find around here) - it would be about $150-200K just for the land! How's that for a farm start?
I buy my hay from a 2,000 acre ranch 10 miles down the road - ranch has been in the family for decades. At today's prices for the area 2,000 acres would be $30Mil! I sometimes buy hay from a place about 40 miles SE of the city, 300 acres owned by someone who was a dentist in the city, bought the land 30 years ago when it was cheap but he stayed a dentist until retirement and is now growing hay and grazing some brangus on the land. If he were to go into business today, 300 acres would cost him about $4.5 million.
People can advertise cheap land in Maine all day long, to be a successful farm business, you need clients nearby, clients who have the money to pay for your labors of love and for what you advertise as organic, fresh, healthy farm produce (can't be fresh when you live in Maine and are shipping it to Dallas, TX). Hence, it is only logical that your farm should be within 45 min to an hour to a city. At least for the city near us, that's some expensive land!
I scream this one from the rooftops - look into aquaponics. You don't need good land or even much land (can use a parking lot or a rented area like behind a church or school) and it uses ~5% of the water regular dirt farming does. There's hundreds of videos up for free on YT showing how it's done and an 1/8 of an acre could be enough income to support a family. You can go the fish plus plant scenario (greens and protein production) or just the greens and use bullet proof goldfish or koi for the fish end of things. The world is going to need many more small local farmers to feed people as big Ag and Monsanto get a worse and worse reputation... don't need a combine or a tractor either and the pumps used to move the water around and aerate it use as little power as a light bulb.
.
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.
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.
Fwiw...
