Posts
Check out this NYT Article: Farm Subsidies Become Target Amid Spending Cuts
"A confluence of factors have lined up against the farm programs. While the rest of the economy remains largely stagnant, commodities prices and farm incomes have remained at a protracted high. The House Agriculture Committee, while still dominated by farm state members, is now peppered with freshmen who view cuts to these programs as an essential part of the broader attack on the federal deficit, the centerpiece of their campaigns."
"Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan and chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, told reporters at a state agriculture conference that “making sure that we’re doing our part in being fiscally responsible” would be the biggest challenge in the next farm bill."
"In 2011, taxpayers are projected to pay roughly $16 billion in aid to farmers through various programs, according to figures from the Congressional Budget Office."
What do you think of farm subsidies?
In light of the corporate-dominance of the agriculture industry, why have these subsidies stuck around since the Great Depression, when this subsidy was created to help average-Joe farmer?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Farm subsidies increase quantity produced of a good, hence it's inefficient and agribusiness is notoriously bad for the environment as well as animal welfare. The subsidies stick around because they aid corporate farmers just as they did the average-Joe schmo. Not to be too conservative, but I want to see how the market would respond if the government was not setting prices. Wouldn't consumer prices decrease?
ReplyDeleteI think it would be interesting to get rid of US subsidies on agricultural products. I think it would improve the world economy as a whole. I remember reading about a country in Africa that could grow its own food sustainably and have good output and make some money of exports to surrounding countries but US food staples were undercutting this countries agriculture production. I think getting rid of the subsidies will also help the local food production and that line of thinking.
ReplyDeleteCheck out this link as well to see what I was saying about Africa.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0416-06.htm
I think completely getting rid of farm subsidies is a really bad idea. As Laura mentioned, they increase the quantity of a good produced... but don't they also help the quality? I mean, don't these subsidies allow for better farming practices by not just the commerical farmer? I do agree that these subsidies are too high, and thus should be reduced; but I think their is too much risk on our entire farming industry to completely eliminate them all at once. And Jenifer, you make and interesting point about local food production.. but I think that works well particularly in third world developing countries. I can't see it working the same way here in the U.S. Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteTexas is currently in the midst of the worst drought in more than four decades. Many farmers across the state are planting crops they know will never grow. In most cases, that means the loans the farmers took out to pay for the planting will be repaid primarily from two sources: government-subsidized crop insurance and direct payments to farmers. I am not completely surprised by the fact that both are coming under fire in Congress as lawmakers look for ways to reduce the federal budget deficit.These subsidies are seen by many as an affront to free market principles, and they have frequently put the U.S. at odds with international trade organizations. I was surprised to see that the issue of subsidies is contentious amongst both Democrats and Republicans. Many Republicans dislike subsidies, which they see as free-market meddling by the government. Agriculture subsidies are also unpopular with many Democrats, who see them as corporate welfare for industrial farming.
ReplyDelete