Farm Subsidies

[Andy823]

Another post pointed out that Michele Bachmann has been pulling in money, government money, through farm subsidies. There are a lot more in congress who are making money from farm subsidies, as well as big corporations. I for one think this program is abused. Wheat farmers getting paid NOT to grow wheat, and many of these farmers are making more now than they did when they were actually growing and selling the wheat!

I have looked up the local wheat growers, and orchardists in my area and was amazed to see how much some of the richest farmers, and orchardists were getting from the government.

If you are interested in check out who gets subsidies in your state, you can go to this site and find out:

http://farm.ewg.org/

[Cha]

Thanks, Andy. Good to have help when you need it but shouldn't be abused or be a hypocrite about it.

[Andy823]

(01-26-2011 08:52 PM)Cha Wrote:  Thanks, Andy. Good to have help when you need it but shouldn't be abused or be a hypocrite about it.

I found the biggest growers in my area getting money under different names they have their orchards under. Lots of money! My own brother in law has pulled in almost $50,000 since 1995, and I know for a fact that money gets used for other things than his orchard! His wife's family gets wheat subsidies, to NOT grow wheat. They have made hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years.

It really needs to be addressed. What I find totally unreal is that while millions around the world are going hungry, we pay farmers to not grow things, or subsidize them forcing prices to go up and the poor can not afford to buy the food they need. It really makes me mad!

[Willinois]

Millions in farm subsidies go to corporate farms and millionaires who don't actually farm. Even worse, the subsidies often support unsustainable practices that provide us with unhealthy food and poisoned watersheds. Now is the time to push for reform while we have a sympathetic ally in the White House.

[Andy823]

(01-27-2011 12:20 AM)Willinois Wrote:  Millions in farm subsidies go to corporate farms and millionaires who don't actually farm. Even worse, the subsidies often support unsustainable practices that provide us with unhealthy food and poisoned watersheds. Now is the time to push for reform while we have a sympathetic ally in the White House.

I agree. I have heard republicans complaining about the subsidies also, so this would be the right time to do something about it. I know a lot of congress come from states that get a lot of these subsidies, and some of the members of congress are also getting huge chunks of money from farm subsidies, but this should be addressed now. Reform is needed, and those in congress need to go after those who are abusing these subsidies.

[sandnsea]

Yeah there are reasons they manage crop production. Has to do with both over/under supply and exhausting land by growing one crop too much. Goes back to the Dust bowl, afaik. There have been tweaks over the years. I generally support the program because it's not feasible to tell a dry land wheat farmer he has to grow soy beans this year, or something equally stupid. A wheat farmer knows how to grow wheat, not tomatoes. So if there is too much acreage in wheat which will disrupt the market, paying a SMALL farmer to not grow wheat is fine by me. What isn't fine by me is subsidizing Monsanto and ConAgra and every other major corporation who can clearly let land sit idle for a year and not go belly-up, unlike the true family farmer.

[Andy823]

(01-27-2011 01:20 AM)sandnsea Wrote:  Yeah there are reasons they manage crop production. Has to do with both over/under supply and exhausting land by growing one crop too much. Goes back to the Dust bowl, afaik. There have been tweaks over the years. I generally support the program because it's not feasible to tell a dry land wheat farmer he has to grow soy beans this year, or something equally stupid. A wheat farmer knows how to grow wheat, not tomatoes. So if there is too much acreage in wheat which will disrupt the market, paying a SMALL farmer to not grow wheat is fine by me. What isn't fine by me is subsidizing Monsanto and ConAgra and every other major corporation who can clearly let land sit idle for a year and not go belly-up, unlike the true family farmer.

Yes I understand about crop management, I to think that SMALL farms need some help at times, but when multi millionaires bought up land, then applied for subsidies to NOT grow the wheat, and are now making huge amounts of money to let the land sit, I too have a problem whether they are huge corporations like Monsanto and Con Agra, or just rich investors who saw a good deal and jumped on the band wagon.

The program needs some drastic regulation, but it also needs oversight so its not abused. You can limit the amount of acreage for farmers to qualify, but many big land owners simply break up the land and divided it out between family members so they still get the money, even though they don't need it. I do agree that small family farms who need help should get it, but we have to stop those who are simply milking the system, investors and big corporations, from getting the subsidies.

[The Desperate Blogger]

Will someone please ask Michelle Bachmann to explain how paying farmers to not grow crops creates jobs?? (Not to mention feeding people...)

I can't wait to see how her answer evolves into comparing "telling people they have to grow crops" to the Nazis...

[KonaKane]

Actually the way our subsidies work gets within swatting range of the socialist collective farming system. Anybody want to inform Ms. Bachmann that she is a socialist in taking the subsidies?

Of course that's not true, but I'd love to see how she handles the irony.