[Previous entry: "Wright Boosts Obama"] [Blog Home] [Next entry: "Race Dialogue"]

05/02/2008 Entry:
We Don't Agree, But...

The Free Market for Agribusiness

I remember when farmers boasted of being self-reliant, taking care of themselves withhout any handouts, rigorous individualists and believers in the free market. What do we have now? Farmers being paid for not producing and not selling. We don't call them handouts any more, they are subsidies.

Now that there is legislation in Congress to reduce farm subsidies, Congress finds it hard to do this. The worst part about this situation is that most of the subsidies are going to agribusiness and not to small farmers. Liberal Kevin Drum quotes conservative Spruiell at the Corner:

Ninety-two percent of farm-dwellers derive either all or most of their income from sources other than farming or subsidies....The other 8 percent — commercial farmers who derive most of their income from farming and subsidies — earned an average of $200,000 last year — an increase of 22 percent from 2006. This year, income for this group is projected to hit $230,000 — another 9.3-percent increase. The USDA, which calculated these estimates, reported last year that the windfall for commercial farmers is due in large part to "demand from the rapid expansion of ethanol production."

....Right now, Congress is attempting to renew farm subsidies for five more years, even though the vast majority of the payments go to farmers who are making six figures a year. The chief obstacle is President Bush, who has threatened to veto the bill in its current form. Bush, who signed the massive 2002 farm bill, has set an unbelievably low bar for Congress to clear, calling only for modest spending restraint in the wake of record farm incomes. Yet Congress cannot even bring itself to cap payments to millionaires, among other simple reforms.

There are at least 2 things terribly wrong. The first is obvious. People earning more thant $200,000 a year are making money off the government - that's us - for doing and offering nothing.

The second is that subsidies are being spent for the "rapid expansion of ethanol production." This obviously is catering to corn states who are using corn to make ethanol. These states don't need subsidies. Business is good, thank you. Besides, corn ethanol offers almost no improvement in carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, corn subsidies have raised food prices all over the world.

We daily annouce to the world that we believe in free trade. What a farce. The only reason U.S agribusiness gets the business is that the many subsidies of corn and ethanol make their corn and other food products artificially cheaper. Take away the subsidies and poor nations would be able to sell their farm products and make a living.

I'm happy to see that President Bush has threatened a veto - the only veto I approve of.

The free market has been suspended by the Congress/agribusiness coalition. Make agribusiness earn its money and restore the free market.

Comment here.

Home | Books | Blog | Learning Fountains | L.F. Directory | About me | Site Map

Copyright 2003 - 5 Paul Siegel. Your email address will not be used or sold for unwanted solicitations.