A view on American subsidies

[wedino]

[wedino]

Sorry about the link, I'll try it again.

[URL="http://www.prairiecentre.com/"] Prairie Centre[/URL]

[wedino]

Holly Crap, look at this.

[URL="http://ewg.org/farm/"]
$71.5 billion[/URL]from '96 to '00

[wilagro]

Before anyone takes the progaganda from the 'Prairie Centre' seriously...please find out what groups and governments are supporting it. You might be surprised to know that MOST farmers do not support this group.

[charliep]

A couple of thoughts on US farm subsidies.

1) US farm subsidies have nothing to do with stabalizing farm incomes but rather contribute to wealth management. The people who have benefited the most are land investors (including farmers) - higher land prices have contributed to their wealth. The people that it hurts are anyone who has to buy land (have to pay high prices for land) and renters (much of the subsidy gets built into rent). Trying to fix/adjust this system is like trying to remove one card from a house of cards - it is likely the whole system will collapse. Land owners/landlords get very mad (likely talk to their congressperson/senator) when land prices drop because of changes to farm policy. Farm managers who have made investment and land decisions become even less profitable. Banks get nervous as they see the security on their loans erode. The US has a real problem south of us. Not much we can do about it. The real hope is an internal where the US taxpayer gets mad and says I've had enough subsidizing who is worth a lot more than I am or the US economy gets into such trouble that they have to look at the places they spend money.

2) A conclusion I have come to in life is that government/taxpayers (including US ones) have the right to spend money anywhere they want. The big issue is to get things right and don't promote one type of crop/livestock over another. A current example is US farm and soybeans. The reason soybean acres have been growing is the most profitable crop for farmer in the mid west to grow when the loan rate is included. I hear a different rumor everyday but it is a real concern if the US includes pulse crops in their farm programs and they set prices too high.

Others thoughts.

[Steve]

I believe a US election is coming up in November, so the politicians will start taking Canadian farm subsidies and the CWB apart. This happens just before every US election because they are trying to tell their farmers that we are the problem for low grain prices.

Farmers shouldn’t plan any large expansions to their operation for the next two to three years, because I think the US dollar is going to start sliding down hard. This will bring the Canadian farm income down at the same rate.

[wedino]

Wilagro, Sorry, I didn’t intend to promote a discussion on the merits of the Prairie Centre. I only wanted to give them credit for the article they reprinted from the Bismarck Tribune.

It seems to me that a lot of farmers are asking for government “money” as a cure all for their problems(I‘m guilty). The article, by Steve Cates, points out some of the problems created by gov’t handouts. I think we should learn from these mistakes, there are other ways that gov’t can help agriculture like implementing joint running rights on our rails & wheat & barley export permits at no cost are two that I can think of. How about dropping excise tax farmers pay on farm fuel! Or allow us to purchase off shore glyphosate.(FNA says there are enormous savings here. Our Pest Management Regulatory Authority has thrown the red flag on this one)

Enuf rambling from me.

[bob4choice]

Wilagro,

Quote:
"You might be surprised to know that MOST farmers do not support this group."

Where is your proof of this? What is it about this group you don't like? Do facts and another opinions scare you or what?

If 40 or more percent of farmers support the policy of this group, is that bad? Why don't you just come out and say that this group is trying to make grain marketing a voluntary option, instead of trying to tarnish their name by suggestion!