Truth about Agri programs needs to finally be exposed to the public

[riders2010]

Since the guys who have had the good weather last few years and are in tune for a huge payout under agristability and are on here telling everyone the guys that have been flooded out are looking for welfare, I think its time the taxpayer know how the agristability program really works and who is getting the money.

What we re saying is not a handout we re saying the program is broken has been broken. Guys that know they are gonna get a huge payout are trying to cloud the issue smoke and mirrors sort of deal. They are the ones in line to collect big dollars welfare style yet want to make sure the people that actually legitimately have had a loss
don t get anything.

Not all farmers think their way but obviously some on this forum do.

Time to expose who gets the money out of these programs.

[bucket]

I agree but got any ideas as to how to do that.

I am stumped on a solution.

[bucket]

I agree but got any ideas as to how to do that.

I am stumped on a solution.

[Oliver88]

The long term solution is to revamp crop insurance so one time payouts are not necessary.

[farming101]

For the 2013 program year a 52.5% drop in our Reference Margin from the previous 5 year Production Margin average would have triggered a ten dollar payment.

The expense margin calculation nixed a potential payout.

Decided to opt out of Agristability for this year.

I guess we know how to save money too good!

[hobbyfrmr]

It seems to me the original program encouraged good agronomy, and investment in proper inputs to grow higher yields in build up the farm average margins. so, the farmers did that. Yields went up, then......prices went up, which increased the farms margins very well.....as it should have.
The powers that be, did a little math and looking forward they realized at the next genuine disaster they would be forced to make an incredible payout that would certainly be met with objection from the general public. That is when they changed the program, substantially decreased the ability to qualify for a payment in which the farmer had earned according to the original program. In my opinion the way it is setup now, it is practically impossible to qualify for Agristability. If it happens that a farm qualifies for payment, by the time the money is distributed,it would be too late.
Somebody like BroadAcre will qualify because of their mess, it's like a little bonus for the very clever executives before they leave grain farming. They managed to stay on salary in order to see the AgStability money come through.

[stonepicker]

So riders, now your fellow farmer is trying to rip you off? A farmer who's had good crops ( good avg.) and now has a poor year isn't supposed to collect from agristability? That's what the program is for! Your paranoid! You just hate to see someone else benefit from a program ( unless it's you ) You're so caught up in needing to know what the next guy is getting, concentrate on your own farm not your neighbour down the road.

[tweety]

Maybe you don't want to be telling the general public how farmers worth millions should be getting more subsidies.

[15444]

Agreed. Doesn't matter if your talking millions in cash or in assets, general public views it all the same. I know my non-farming siblings would be telling you to sell out/downsize if you can't make a go of it in the current marketplace. It's what normal joe's do on a regular basis.

[ajl]

Design a fair and equitable farm program? Easier to land astronauts on Jupiter. Don't know why a proper crop insurance program seems to elude the government types. All is would need is a have both a yield and price component and yields reflective of the average of the last 5 years instead of 1962 be available to relatively new growers. But all that apparently is impossible.

[binthere]

coverage based on previous years or multiple years of production is what is the down fall of any program. any coverage should be based on in put costs. this deters the scabs that abuse any program and promotes better farming practices.

[Richard5]

Bin there, do you understand the rules of the program? Because it's exactly what you are asking

Anyone that is a half decent farmer will have a achieved a margin higher under the old rules verses the new margin calculation that is based on eligible costs. It is the lower off the two that you use.

I think the program will still have more benefit than many of you in the drought area give it credit for

[Hopperbin]

Well said Richard. The ones to complain though are the mixed operation farmers. Perhaps they don't complain on agriville cause their tooooo busy working. Really if we make it on cost of.production that is ridiculous. Think of the corruption then. Win some lose some. Just do the best.

[Richard5]

Good point hopper but I throw this back at you

If a mixed farm has poor crop but good returns on livestock then what is the true loss? One offsets the other. If the livestock were not there the true loss would be larger and the program would cover about fifty percent of the loss. Although it's more work, I'd rather have both enterprises helping me stay profitable

If both enterprises suffer a bad year the program will provide benefits.

[sumdumguy]

Richard, the calf crop offsets the grain loss, you are correct.