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.
So you don't mind there are government handouts because of policies that a government implemented?
It could be worse, he could be throwing another 6 billion at the solar industry so they could buy even more Chinese made solar panels.
When you are looking at any actions like this you need to consider the goal, the goal here is to stabilize the farmers until the trade dispute is settled. Leveraging the vast economic resources of the US government short term certainly seems reasonable to meet the goal of long term economic prosperity for the entire economy.
Last edited by thecoalman; 08-29-2018 at 06:19 PM..
It could be worse, he could throwing another 6 billion at the solar industry so they could buy even more Chinese made solar panels.
When you are looking at any actions like this you need to consider the goal, the goal here is to stabilize the farmers until the trade dispute is settled. Leveraging the vast economic resources of the US government short term certainly seems reasonable to meet the goal of long term economic prosperity for the entire economy.
we have to make everyone poorer in order to make a few rich. Solid plan
Either FDR's programs are handouts or they aren't.
Generally speaking while there is certainly issues the farm subsidies are neither. They are there to insure a stable food supply and prices. Farming is a somewhat unique industry because you are dependent on the whims of Mother Nature. This leads to unpredictability in the market. If the farmer has good growing season they may have plentiful crops but the market for them is worthless, if the farmer has a bad growing season the value of the product is high but not a lot of product to sell.
If left to their own decisions they would plant less and during a bad growing season the food supply is at risk and prices are through the roof. The subsidies insure they overplant guaranteeing the food supply and stability in prices.
Generally speaking while there is certainly issues the farm subsidies are neither. They are there to insure a stable food supply and prices. Farming is a somewhat unique industry because you are dependent on the whims of Mother Nature. This leads to unpredictability in the market. If the farmer has good growing season they may have plentiful crops but the market for them is worthless, if the farmer has a bad growing season the value of the product is high but not a lot of product to sell.
If left to their own decisions they would plant less and during a bad growing season the food supply is at risk and prices are through the roof. The subsidies insure they overplant guaranteeing the food supply and stability in prices.
So the independent farmer is a myth and the farmer who takes responsibility for his own voting, including voting for trade wars, without demanding bailouts from taxpayers is also a myth apparently...
It could be worse, he could be throwing another 6 billion at the solar industry so they could buy even more Chinese made solar panels.
Which was also theft of income and profits.
Quote:
When you are looking at any actions like this you need to consider the goal, the goal here is to stabilize the farmers until the trade dispute is settled. Leveraging the vast economic resources of the US government short term certainly seems reasonable to meet the goal of long term economic prosperity for the entire economy.
There is nothing reasonable about theft. The U.S. government doesn't have "vast economic resources;" all they have is hundreds upon hundreds of billions of FRNs forcibly confiscated from the profits of entrepreneurs and the income of their employees.
Well he s gettin away with.it. He isn't POTUS for America. He s POTUS for access to a bottomless piggy bank. Its a dream come true. And the greatest scheme perpetrated upon the USA in all her History.
When I consider a subsidy that is being given by the government I ask myself does this make sense. The alternative to the subsidies is potentially mass starvation so it makes perfect sense, yes?
As far as the specific actions here once again it's short term solution to meet a long term goal of economic prosperity for the entire economy, once again it's perfectly sensible.
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.
