Careful what you wish for: commodity groups ditch Sustainable Agriculture Strategy

[Landdownunder]

Come to oz where its sink or swim no insurance here.

Doesn't it drive price of land up in marginal areas?

[Landdownunder]

Context you can farm marginal areas in Canada , knowing full well you will get a payout or is premium getting prohibitive in lower yielding areas?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Come to oz where its sink or swim no insurance here.

Doesn't it drive price of land up in marginal areas?

I would agree that 100% of all subsidies/safety nets end up as higher land rent or purchase prices. Rip off the bandaid.

[Old Cowzilla]

Context you can farm marginal areas in Canada , knowing full well you will get a payout or is premium getting prohibitive in lower yielding areas?

Can't speak for other provinces but in Manitoba continued crop failures will reduce coverage and increase premiums. Just like any other ins. Also reduced coverage to new customers at first to control change of company names after a few bad years. Funny thing our worst years for claims have been wet years not drought like you would think it would be. Improved farming practices have been game changers.

[sumdumguy]

Farm groups ditch sustainable agriculture ? They will ditch anything Trudope. Good Job! Out mit the shcrap!!!!

[shtferbrains]

The did get the 30% nitrogen reduction gone

[ajl]

Context you can farm marginal areas in Canada , knowing full well you will get a payout or is premium getting prohibitive in lower yielding areas?

I do farm marginal land and claims reduce your coverage. Had small claims during 2017 through 2020 on at least one crop during that period and quite a large one in 2021 due to drought. Good crops in 2022 and 23 started to rebuild coverage. 24 was mediocre with everything coming in at 10% over guarantee so no payout. Given that 24 yields were slightly less than long term average, it will slightly depress coverage in future years again. This is in Alberta.

[chuckChuck]

I don't think taxpayers want to be subsidizing safety nets for the Monettes or any other very large scale corporate farm that is using foreign investors to drive up the price of land that drives smaller farms out of business.

You gotta laugh at the farmers who complain about safety net programs and then deny the ever increasing cost of climate change and severe weather events.

They will accept increasing payments in subsidized programs but continue to deny that climate change is a threat? Go figure!



"The financial numbers, however, illustrate why governments are stepping up to lead the sustainability discussion. Production volatility is becoming more expensive for taxpayers as well as farmers.

Federal government payments devoted to stabilizing the sector — which totalled $6.5 billion in 2023 — have more than doubled in the past five years and tripled over the past decade. An increasing proportion of that spending is going to crop insurance payments to compensate farmers for weather-related production shortfalls caused by drought, excess moisture or killing frost.

Between 2019 and 2023, crop insurance payouts have averaged 56 per cent of total direct federal payments. In the five years previous, that average was 44 per cent. In the five years before that, they averaged 34 per cent. At this pace, it won’t be long before propping up the status quo consumes the entire agriculture budget. That’s unsustainable."
?

[Hamloc]

I don't think taxpayers want to be subsidizing safety nets for the Monettes or any other very large scale corporate farm that is using foreign investors to drive up the price of land that drives smaller farms out of business.

You gotta laugh at the farmers who complain about safety net programs and then deny the ever increasing cost of climate change and severe weather events.

They will accept increasing payments in subsidized programs but continue to deny that climate change is a threat? Go figure!



"The financial numbers, however, illustrate why governments are stepping up to lead the sustainability discussion. Production volatility is becoming more expensive for taxpayers as well as farmers.

Federal government payments devoted to stabilizing the sector — which totalled $6.5 billion in 2023 — have more than doubled in the past five years and tripled over the past decade. An increasing proportion of that spending is going to crop insurance payments to compensate farmers for weather-related production shortfalls caused by drought, excess moisture or killing frost.

Between 2019 and 2023, crop insurance payouts have averaged 56 per cent of total direct federal payments. In the five years previous, that average was 44 per cent. In the five years before that, they averaged 34 per cent. At this pace, it won’t be long before propping up the status quo consumes the entire agriculture budget. That’s unsustainable."
?

As Furrow pointed out higher commodity prices in 2022-2024 have increased crop insurance payouts.
As far as the continually fluctuating weather goes the most practical thing I can do as a farmer is do my best to conserve moisture, continue to manage spending on inputs as carefully as possible and only go in debt for appreciable assets.

What I don’t get Chuck2 is what your point is!? Are you attempting to say that a federal government that spends roughly $500 billion a year can’t continue to help pay $3-4 billion towards crop insurance? Food producers aren’t worth 1% of federal expenditures? Please clarify?!

[cropgrower]

I think the crop insurance here is very similar to the subsidies in Europe , its a way to keep farmers producing lots of cheep commodities , governments know their will be anarchy if food runs short

[cropgrower]

Yet again cc you are barking up the wrong tree

[shtferbrains]

Governments goal with Covid spending was the stimulate the economy with no trailing liabilities.
So no spending on any programs, projects, or infrastructure that could go over budget or require annual payments.

So essentially hit the flush button and the money disappeared with nothing left to show for it?

Now we have $51 billion interest per year that is like a credit card payment on a holiday we took 5 years ago.

At least the $3 billion crop insurance encourages production.
They get it back on the taxes collected when that production goes through the economy.
All the business farmers support and all industry that touches that product.

Mostly recently government seems to just make money disappear?

[blackpowder]

Last I looked my AFSC payout vs premium history has me having paid in more than I've received. Definitely not a subsidy.
Removing insurance will simply aid the acceleration of consolidation that is continuing to happen naturally.
Many opinions regarding insurance seem to be as ill conceived as the ones tying carbon mandates to productivity.
Monette exists simply because of a supply demand imbalance.
Chuck's opinions exist only because he can afford them.

[chuckChuck]

And shite for brains farmers and their families also got CEBA and income support payments after businesses closed, workers were laid off and everyone was locked down.

So unless you wanted millions of people to have no income during the pandemic, how would you of handled it differently?

Because Trump spent billions as well!

[chuckChuck]

Last I looked my AFSC payout vs premium history has me having paid in more than I've received. Definitely not a subsidy.
Removing insurance will simply aid the acceleration of consolidation that is continuing to happen naturally.
Many opinions regarding insurance seem to be as ill conceived as the ones tying carbon mandates to productivity.
Monette exists simply because of a supply demand imbalance.
Chuck's opinions exist only because he can afford them.

Did you calculate the share of the premiums paid for by taxpayers every year? 60% paid for governments 40% by producers.
So you need to add those government paid premiums into what you received!

Check your math BP.