Welfare Queens

[ElNono]

Farmers Facing Loss of Subsidy May Get New One (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/business/when-one-farm-subsidy-ends-another-may-rise-to-replace-it.html?hp)

It seems a rare act of civic sacrifice: in the name of deficit reduction, lawmakers from both parties are calling for the end of a longstanding agricultural subsidy that puts about $5 billion a year in the pockets of their farmer constituents. Even major farm groups are accepting the move, saying that with farmers poised to reap bumper profits, they must do their part.

But in the same breath, the lawmakers and their farm lobby allies are seeking to send most of that money — under a new name — straight back to the same farmers, with most of the benefits going to large farms that grow commodity crops like corn, soybeans, wheat and cotton. In essence, lawmakers would replace one subsidy with a new one.

“We are very much aware of the budgetary constraints of the federal government,” said Garry Niemeyer, an Illinois farmer who is president of the National Corn Growers Association. “We want to do our part as corn growers to help resolve those issues, but we only want to do our proportional part. We don’t want to have everything taken out on us.”

But Vincent H. Smith, a professor of farm economics at Montana State University, called the maneuver a bait and switch.

“There’s a persistent story that farming is on the edge of catastrophe in America and that’s why they need safety nets that other people don’t get,” he said. “And the reality is that it’s really a very healthy industry.”

Read more (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/business/when-one-farm-subsidy-ends-another-may-rise-to-replace-it.html?hp)

[4>0rings]

I thought this was going to be about corporations that demand welfare tax breaks or welfare subsidies or they will take their companies overseas.

[DMC]

Since the early 80's farmers have been divided into two distinct groups: producers and the rest.

I grew up farming, and I've seen both sides extensively. There are real farmers who want to produce a crop and there are land owners who grow shit and weeds and then let it rot in the fields to collect subsidies. They get paid to not burn their fields of weeds. Of course there's a few stalks of soybeans hiding in there, but it's mostly weeds.

People who grew up in rural areas probably have seen the fertile fields that produce long rows of crops, and beside these fields the scattered Johnson grass, cuckle burr and morning glory weeds that are passed off as crops. On these latter fields sit decrepit farm implements and nearby sit old, out of service tractors and remnants of what was once a do or die operation. When weeds are taller than the tractors, you know it's been deferred maintenance for years.

Still, these "farmers" piss and moan all year until subsidy time, then they buy their kids new vehicles (4x4 trucks of course because they have to mind the fields) and all the money is spent, yet no tractor or implement ever moves from it's grave.

We are paying people to be idle. I never understood it. The only thing I can figure is that it's like a reserve where we can make it productive if we choose. If the farmer actually becomes productive, they scoff at it because it drives down the price of a bushel of wheat or corn or soybeans.

Really, it's a losing game.

But it's what keeps the Southern Democrats voting for the person who supports it, and the Southern Democrat farmer holds a lot of power amongst the community.

[ElNono]

Heck, I even understand the logic of keeping a national food supply. But you get the feeling those subsidies go way beyond keeping that market competitive...

[Trainwreck2100]

quit with the fucking corn subsidies already

[Wild Cobra]

Heck, I even understand the logic of keeping a national food supply. But you get the feeling those subsidies go way beyond keeping that market competitive...
All noble ideas get corrupted. These subsidies should just end. Maybe not suddenly, give everyone warning and timelines, but they need to end.