It's time to end welfare for farmers

[KC0VWU]

If they can't survive on their own then they should go close down like any other business.

[W4BD]

KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from. Most of what you eat comes from farmer' crops. Even your meat is raised on farms. A good example if the way things are done today is peanuts. Back in 1955 the farmer made about 1 ton of peanuts to the Acre and got $300-350 a ton. Today's farmer makes about 2 1/2 tons to the Acre and gets $300- 350 a ton. The same with corn or cotton. The prices are about the same as 1955 per unit they just make more to the Acre. Back in 1955 if you made a ton of peanuts or 100 bushels of corn or a bale of cotton to an Acre you had a very good year.


73's

[KW4MW]

He can always rely upon ConAgra!

[KC0VWU]

Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 28 2007,21:23)]KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from.
Not all of the farmers would shut down, just the ones who don't know how to run a business. I know people who get paid *not* to grow anything on swampland - if that isn't welfare I don't what is.

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 30 2007,00:23)]KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from. #Most of what you eat comes from farmer' crops. # Even your meat is raised on farms. #A good example if the way things are done today is peanuts. #Back in 1955 the farmer made about 1 ton of peanuts to the Acre and got $300-350 a ton. #Today's farmer makes about 2 1/2 tons to the Acre and gets $300- 350 a ton. #The same with corn or cotton. #The prices are about the same as 1955 per unit they just make more to the Acre. #Back in 1955 if you made a ton of peanuts or 100 bushels of corn or a bale of cotton to an Acre you had a very good year.


73's
The unprofitable operations will go by the way side and those who know how to manage a business will thrive.

Your pricing example is in with everything else. A PC back in the day was $3,500 to $5,000 for a basic model, now they are under $1K. Cars have held steady, gasoline - adjusted for inflation hasn't done much -- same for steel.

Those industries had to adapt, improve and offer greater value to complete. By not forcing the same upon farmers, they are being given the opportunity to not keep up with the times and make money.

[N5NPO]

Quote[/b] (n9yb @ Mar. 30 2007,04:28)]Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 30 2007,00:23)]KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from. #Most of what you eat comes from farmer' crops. # Even your meat is raised on farms. #A good example if the way things are done today is peanuts. #Back in 1955 the farmer made about 1 ton of peanuts to the Acre and got $300-350 a ton. #Today's farmer makes about 2 1/2 tons to the Acre and gets $300- 350 a ton. #The same with corn or cotton. #The prices are about the same as 1955 per unit they just make more to the Acre. #Back in 1955 if you made a ton of peanuts or 100 bushels of corn or a bale of cotton to an Acre you had a very good year.


73's
The unprofitable operations will go by the way side and those who know how to manage a business will thrive. #

Your pricing example is in with everything else. #A PC back in the day was $3,500 to $5,000 for a basic model, now they are under $1K. #Cars have held steady, gasoline - adjusted for inflation hasn't done much -- same for steel.

Those industries had to adapt, improve and offer greater value to complete. #By not forcing the same upon farmers, they are being given the opportunity to not keep up with the times and make money.
Wow, sounds a lot like you are describing a free market economy. What an amazing concept.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

The trouble is that the family farm would be gone.
But, 98% of all deaths happen at the family farm.
The larger factory farm is where it is at, scale of economy at work.
This is just the way it is.
So, this would change rural America, as the large factory farm does not buy things from the local mom and pop.
But than again, the chain stores like tractor supply company have eliminated most of them.

[N4AUD]

If we invest in biofuel technology, we'll be taking farmers off welfare AND start to wean ourselves off of the Middle Eastern oil addiction we have now.

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] (N5NPO @ Mar. 30 2007,09:31)]Quote[/b] (n9yb @ Mar. 30 2007,04:28)]Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 30 2007,00:23)]KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from. #Most of what you eat comes from farmer' crops. # Even your meat is raised on farms. #A good example if the way things are done today is peanuts. #Back in 1955 the farmer made about 1 ton of peanuts to the Acre and got $300-350 a ton. #Today's farmer makes about 2 1/2 tons to the Acre and gets $300- 350 a ton. #The same with corn or cotton. #The prices are about the same as 1955 per unit they just make more to the Acre. #Back in 1955 if you made a ton of peanuts or 100 bushels of corn or a bale of cotton to an Acre you had a very good year.


73's
The unprofitable operations will go by the way side and those who know how to manage a business will thrive. #

Your pricing example is in with everything else. #A PC back in the day was $3,500 to $5,000 for a basic model, now they are under $1K. #Cars have held steady, gasoline - adjusted for inflation hasn't done much -- same for steel.

Those industries had to adapt, improve and offer greater value to complete. #By not forcing the same upon farmers, they are being given the opportunity to not keep up with the times and make money.
Wow, sounds a lot like you are describing a free market economy. What an amazing concept.
I'd have my MBA from Chicago revoked if I didn't stand tall for free markets.

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] (n4aud @ Mar. 30 2007,09:52)]If we invest in biofuel technology, we'll be taking farmers off welfare AND start to wean ourselves off of the Middle Eastern oil addiction we have now.
True, but then there will be complaints due to the unintended consequences. Feedlot costs going up, corn syrup going up, etc...


but it is worth it IMHO.

[N5NPO]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 30 2007,04:46)]Hello.

The trouble is that the family farm would be gone.
But, 98% of all deaths happen at the family farm.
The larger factory farm is where it is at, scale of economy at work.
This is just the way it is.
So, this would change rural America, as the large factory farm does not buy things from the local mom and pop.
But than again, the chain stores like tractor supply company have eliminated most of them.
Look, we can't keep eveything the way it was back in 1950. It would be nice in some respects, but there are too many dynamics. In 1950 most gas stations were mom and pop and had a mechanic/owner and pumped your gas and washed your windshield. The free marked determined that things would change. Are all these mom and pop gas station owners destitute and homeless. No, most I am sure moved on to bigger and better things.
I kinda wish I had grown up in the 50's and 60's, but all in all the 70's and 80's were not so bad (IMHO).

[KI4ITV]

Quote[/b] (n9yb @ Mar. 29 2007,23:55)]Quote[/b] (n4aud @ Mar. 30 2007,09:52)]If we invest in biofuel technology, we'll be taking farmers off welfare AND start to wean ourselves off of the Middle Eastern oil addiction we have now.
True, but then there will be complaints due to the unintended consequences. #Feedlot costs going up, corn syrup going up, etc...


but it is worth it IMHO.
I really don't think it's worth it. #The unintended consequences are enormous and generally underestimated. #The consumer cost of many everyday food items will skyrocket due to the competition. (especially if government subsidies and preference are instituted for fuel use) #The poor in America and under-developed countries will be the hardest hit. #If this happens, unrest will take root and the possibilities are very sobering. #There will be politically powerful (globally connected) people ready to take advantage under the guise of equity and it is possible for the whole worlds political climate to change in the name of FAIRNESS.

...And all this for a 10% fuel blend that gives me 10% less gas mileage. #Net gain for the world---ZERO.

Be careful what you wish for. #We don’t eat oil and the key to a mans heart is through his stomach.

[n9yb]

good point.

[KD6NIG]

I don't think it should end, but it should be a REASONABLE amount of money, not a massive payout to let the fields sit and do nothing.

If you or I are laid off our job and request unemployment, we get an amount of money based on what we made in the last 18 months. Of course, there is a cap imposed, but most people at an average job get around 60-70% of what they made.

These payoffs should probably be the same. Take the farmers income over the last 18 months and make the payoff a percentage of that.

This could be how it works already, but from what I've read on the topic, they get a lot of money (often much more than they would actually make if they didn't leave the fields fallow) and, with that, who can blame them for taking the money and not doing anything?

I don't have a problem with people who try to work being subsidized, but it needs to be at an even level for everyone.

Those who work harder than at any job to remain on the government dole need to get off the couch and work every once in a while. I have more of a problem with people who work zero days a week, get free housing and food and money, and live in section 8 housing with a brand new car and $500 payment out front, than farmers who are willing to work but don't because the government tells them to. At least someone is telling them not to work, they aren't just sitting on their hands refusing to do so.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 29 2007,19:23)]KC0VWU

Well if the farmers shut down where are you going to get your food from. #Most of what you eat comes from farmer' crops. # Even your meat is raised on farms. #A good example if the way things are done today is peanuts. #Back in 1955 the farmer made about 1 ton of peanuts to the Acre and got $300-350 a ton. #Today's farmer makes about 2 1/2 tons to the Acre and gets $300- 350 a ton. #The same with corn or cotton. #The prices are about the same as 1955 per unit they just make more to the Acre. #Back in 1955 if you made a ton of peanuts or 100 bushels of corn or a bale of cotton to an Acre you had a very good year.


73's
Well, the real problem here is that the farm subsidy program pays farmers NOT to grow crops. This is worse than socialism....it's sheer stupidity. Take away the farm subsidies, and the incentive for doing nothing goes away.

We would have a thriving agriculture in interiror Alaska if they hadn't gotten into the anti-productive farm subsidy program here...it basically killed Alaskan agriculture

eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n9yb @ Mar. 30 2007,04:55)]Quote[/b] (n4aud @ Mar. 30 2007,09:52)]If we invest in biofuel technology, we'll be taking farmers off welfare AND start to wean ourselves off of the Middle Eastern oil addiction we have now.
True, but then there will be complaints due to the unintended consequences. #Feedlot costs going up, corn syrup going up, etc...


but it is worth it IMHO.
Willie Nelson gets it. He's a strange bird, but he does know how to run a business. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

eric

[K0RGR]

I'll be the first one to confess that despite living in the middle of King Corn country for many years now, I don't understand the farm subsidy system as well as I should.

A few years ago, somebody published a list of all the farmers in Iowa, and what the subsidies were that they received. I remember my farmer father-in-law coming unglued, first, because they had published his name, but more so because he was shocked at how much the richest farmers in town, and all the 'hobby' farmers, had received in subsidies. He was particularly upset because some of these folks were what he called 'draft dodgers' in WWII, and for the first time, he understood how they could afford those Cadillacs and winters in Florida.

The farm subsidies were put in place to try to save the family farmer - the little guy - who simply couldn't make it without some help. But, what's really happened is that now, most of the subsidies go to huge corporate farmers - yes, the ConAgra's.

Farming is becoming one giant, vertically integrated business, with the corporations owning everything. The little guys have to take what their corporate competitors will give them for their goods - they don't have a choice. Until very recently, corn prices had remained unchanged for decades, while the cost of production has soared. Have you priced out a tractor or a combine lately? You think your house is expensive - ha!

The best relief for this in history is taking place right now - ETHANOL. The little farmers here have gotten together and formed cooperatives to build their own ethanol plants. This has caused a big rise in corn prices. We're seeing the same thing start to happen with soybeans and biodiesel. It's profitable to just grow grains on your 5-600 acre farm again. Farmers are taking their idled land out of the federal subsidy programs so they can grow more corn and beans for use in these fuels.

I have lots of hope for future windfarms, too. You can still grow corn and beans under those things, and the dead birds make good fertilizer.

Unfortunately, Wall Street has figured this out, and they're here buying up these ethanol plants. THANK GOD, many of these farmer coops are refusing to sell to them!

As the bumper stickers say "Don't curse farmers with your mouth full!".

This message brought to you by the Democratic-FARMER-Labor Party of Minnesota, aka, the DEMOCRATS.

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (KW4MW @ Mar. 29 2007,13:30)]He can always rely upon ConAgra!
Did someone say ConAgra?

<Stand and Salute>

My Heros. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Mar. 30 2007,08:03)]Quote[/b] (KW4MW @ Mar. 29 2007,13:30)]He can always rely upon ConAgra!
Did someone say ConAgra?

<Stand and Salute>

My Heros. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Is that anything like ViAgra? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[w3scm]

Like so much else in this society, the conclusions drawn by some here are inaccurate because they are based on news snippets and "common knowledge" which happen to be wrong.

I have spent a considerable part of my life in farm country and I am 54 (I am NOT a farmer nor am I related to one). #I know lots of farmers. #If it was so easy for them to get "welfare" as you put it, or subsidies, then why are family farms dying all over the place?

The truly lucrative subsidies are, in a word, set up so they actually benefit people already in a good position, i.e., the rich and the big agri-companies. #The mom and pop farmers on a small holding are basically at the mercy of the weather and the middlemen, as they always have been.

Does anyone know that milk provides a return on investment (actual pricve paid per hundredweight) for the little guy that is LITERALLY (not in adjusted dollars, in real dollars) less than it was 30 years ago? #It's the [huge] middlemen who profit on this and who control the distribution pipelines. #The farmer's COST, however, has risen tremendously.

You talk about efficiency determining who succeeds in a "free market". #Well, the agri-giants have the lawyers, the accountants, the start-up capital and the clout to find the best places to operate, with the cheapest land and labor, where the taxes are lowest and usually, where they will get a tax-forgiveness incentive to locate. #They can take advantage of tax loopholes and all sorts of other stuff that the little guy can't. #And they can donate big $$ to the local congressman, and write that off the profit sheet and at the same time get some favorable legislation passed. #That's how it works in "free market" America.

What your free market also gets you is food factories run on the bottom line. That means monoculture (how many varieties of tomatoes do you think are raised by the big boys? #Do you think they chose those 3 varieties on how they taste and how nutritious they are, or how well they ship half-ripe on a train from California to Ohio?). #It #means E. coli in your veggies and meat that is full of hormones and chemicals, and animals raised in a living version of Hell.

When the ol' free market finally knocks just about every small guy to the mat, then you're going to see food prices based on whatever they want to charge you cause you won't have anywhere else to go. #It's the long term goal of Walmart, Rite Aid, and other forward-thinking corporations looking to be a monopoly.

Now, if you happen to qualify as a minority of some sort, you can get all kinds of free money to "start" your farm and all kinds of low rate or forgivable "loans" to run it. #The guy who already HAS a farm, however, gets jack. #Yeah, that's welfare but not to the farmers.

How about the guy with 100 pastoral treed acres, that he afford to leave like that and get a nice chunk of taxpayer money for having a "tree farm"? #That a farmer?

Or the rich guy who can afford to have a couple of hundred or thousand acres lie fallow while he exploits the surplus avoidance money gift (I mean program) for not planting whatever is supposed to be surplus this year. #That sound like a farmer to you?

The "inefficiency" of the small farmer is being unlucky enough to be small and therefore unable to take advantage of the legal tax dollar rip-offs the bought-and-paid-for legislation provides for the big guys.

[KI4ITV]

Points well taken here, Scott.

But, there are incentives that border on the obscene.
"Alpaca farming" comes to mind. A true "fleecing" of the American taxpayer, in my opinion.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (KC0VWU @ Mar. 29 2007,19:04)]If they can't survive on their own then they should go close down like any other business.
As long as they are small family owned farms then I agree. Let them go sink for their stupidity. But if they are owned by large corporations then I say yes, give em all the welfare they want and then give em some more.

You see as a true republican I feel that welfare stinks when it is given to people who are poor who may need it. Let those poor people rot. Their own stupidity is what made them poor. Why should we pay for stupidity ?

Only rich powerful corporations should get welfare assistance.

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] ]Take the farmers income over the last 18 months and make the payoff a percentage of that.


If you want a low risk life, then you should accept a low reward life (financially that is).

[W4BD]

N9YB

Well when I said a ton of peanuts was $300-350 back in 1955 I ment that was what you were paid then. Now today a ton of peanuts still bring $300-350 a ton in today's dollar. The price of fertilizer has gone through the roof and red diesel fuel has jumped from $1.50 a gallon to $2.25 a gallon in the last 2 years and picking peanuts takes about 10-15 gallons an hour of fuel per picker.

Con-Agra buys from farmers also ADM buys from farmers. We grow a lot of tomatoes, corn, peanuts , english peas, string beans, carrots and onions here in Seminole County. Does any of it show up in the local Wal-Mart-- NO. It's all shipped off somewhere else and the veggies in Wal-Mart is brought in from somewhere else so we pay higher prices due to shipping cost.

We have what we call "Mega Farmers" here in SW Ga. They each are renting several thousand Acres of land which all have pivot irrigation and make a fair living. Most small "Mom and Pop" farmers are renting their farm to the Mega Farmers just to pay the property tax on the land.

73's

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 30 2007,02:46)]Quote[/b] (KC0VWU @ Mar. 29 2007,19:04)]If they can't survive on their own then they should go close down like any other business.
As long as they are small family owned farms then I agree. Let them go sink for their stupidity. But if they are owned by large corporations then I say yes, give em all the welfare they want and then give em some more.

You see as a true republican I feel that welfare stinks when it is given to people who are poor who may need it. Let those poor people rot. Their own stupidity is what made them poor. Why should we pay for stupidity ?

Only rich powerful corporations should get welfare assistance.
Now you are talkin'. Corporate welfare is what rules in this nation. Those poor schmoes out there in their fields, sweatin' up a storm so that we may partake in low-cost meals, working for a loss, do not need our help. Screw em. Prop up the major corporations so they can pull in those billions and billions more.

I say "give that money to those with a 7 car garage filled with a Lexus for every day of the week." Not the guy with a Funky old Rebuilt Dodge pickup.

N9YB says Quote[/b] ]If you want a low risk life, then you should accept a low reward life (financially that is). But those guys don't even reap a "low reward". They should starve for the stupid unions who will not protect them for their parity. Starve I say. I want to see Americans starve.

Go Republicans.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Mar. 30 2007,09:51)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 30 2007,02:46)]Quote[/b] (KC0VWU @ Mar. 29 2007,19:04)]If they can't survive on their own then they should go close down like any other business.
As long as they are small family owned farms then I agree. Let them go sink for their stupidity. But if they are owned by large corporations then I say yes, give em all the welfare they want and then give em some more.

You see as a true republican I feel that welfare stinks when it is given to people who are poor who may need it. #Let those poor people rot. Their own stupidity is what made them poor. Why should we pay for stupidity ?

Only rich powerful corporations should get welfare assistance.
Now you are talkin'. #Corporate welfare is what rules in this nation. #Those poor schmoes out there in their fields, sweatin' up a storm so that we may partake in low-cost meals, working for a loss, do not need our help. #Screw em. #Prop up the major corporations so they can pull in those billions and billions more.

I say "give that money to those with a 7 car garage filled with a Lexus for every day of the week." #Not the guy with a Funky old Rebuilt Dodge pickup.

N9YB says Quote[/b] ]If you want a low risk life, then you should accept a low reward life (financially that is). But those guys don't even reap a "low reward". #They should starve for the stupid unions who will not protect them for their parity. #Starve I say. #I want to see Americans starve.

Go Republicans.
Nothing pleases me more than to see weathy corporate CEO's get richer and richer while poor and middle classses get strapped with higher bills, higher taxes, higher medical expenses, and have to work harder and longer hours only to see their jobs outsourced to India or Pakistan. hey, if they were stupid enough to chose a profession that will be outsourced then tough noogies on them,

[w3mv]

Quote[/b] (w4bd @ Mar. 30 2007,09:29)]We have what we call "Mega Farmers" here in SW Ga. They each are renting several thousand Acres of land which all have pivot irrigation and make a fair living. Most small "Mom and Pop" farmers are renting their farm to the Mega Farmers just to pay the property tax on the land.
We have something a little stranger happening here in the part of Maryland in which I live. Real estate speculators have purchased many of the farms. These farms are rented out to mom-and-pop farmers who grow subsidized commodities. The farmers receive welfare from the government, and the real estate speculators get to keep their agricultural property tax assessments in addition to generating rental income. IMHO, these lands should be taxed as what they really are; namely, investment property. This is nothing more than a tax evasion scheme that has an actual net cost to tax payers.