It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Government bailouts for farmers set to make failing even more profitable

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 11:05 AM

Some legislators would like us to believe that the days of farm subsidies are about to end, that lawmakers will cut spending and save taxpayer money. The fact is that, instead of direct payment subsidies to farmers, Congress is now considering expanding a federal crop insurance program that would reimburse for most losses or drops in prices, potential hazards of any entrepreneurial activity. If farmed land does not yield enough crops or if food prices fall, farmers would be reimbursed through a new crop insurance program, an outcome that not only will cost taxpayers billions of dollars, but will also raise concerns about incentivizing farmers to take extraordinary risks.

The new farm legislation is welcomed by Big Agribusiness, farm lobbyists, and lawmakers who typically protect entitlement programs and come up with new ones. These sectors would like us to believe that this new farm program will save us billions of dollars in direct payment subsidies that pays farmland owners regardless of whether they plant crops. However, the truth is that the new legislation will incentivize farmers to exploit land with very high risk of crop failure. At a cost of $3 billion per year, the new crop insurance subsidy will cover any losses to farmers, known as deductibles, before their crop insurance policies pay out.


Why are we expediting farmer's wellfare, when it cost so much already and they're doing so little to benefit the economy as it is? I don't dislike farmers, but as some point they need to stop expecting the government to pay their bills.

We have needed to apply more technology to food production for a while in my opinion. World hunger is already a real problem.

In 1990, the US government defined sustainable agriculture in Public Law 101-624, Title XVI, Subtitle A, Section 1683, as “an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will, over the long term, satisfy human food and fiber needs; enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends; make the most efficient use of nonrenewable resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls; sustain the economic viability of farm operations; and enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.”


Why not invest the money in the form of capital to those interested in solving the problem, rather than skimming the system?

Just another case of the government preserving the status quo and screwing everyone else over, just like wallstreet and all the other bailouts.
edit on 26-7-2012 by AnarchysAngel because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 08:52 PM
Yesterday it was announced that beef pork and chicken, along with dairy and eggs are to rise in cost to the US consumer by 4%
Striking was that with the drought in the US no mention of stopping the subsidy of Corn grown as a fuel.

I just dont know what to think any more

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 08:57 PM
90 percent of the subsidies probably go to 10 percent of the farmers. The big corporate farmers take advantage of the program and there is little left for the little guy. I read an article a while back on this. Crop insurance is available to all farmers but small farmers have a hard time affording extra things like this.

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 08:59 PM
reply to post by rebellender

Prices are going to go up more than four percent. Who are they trying to kid. When the livestock food increases it has a big effect on price. Cows and pigs eat a lot of food.

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 11:48 PM
reply to post by AnarchysAngel

I might recommend you go work with a farmer for a summer and see what it is they actually do before you go and say things like they don't benefit our economy. Unless you are completely self sufficient grow/raise all your own food you are depending on farmers to stay alive.

Now I don't know enough about how they are subsidized and corporate farms but I do know if all farmers say "piss off" it doesn't pay to farm anymore then we're all in a world of hurt.

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 10:23 AM
reply to post by taccj9903

I know more than a few farmers. They're LAZY! A local farm recently hired twenty illegals because they were too lazy to remove brush from their property.

I also happen to know a "small" farmer. They rent out their trashed land to bigger farm owners, so those bigger farm owners can cash in on increased subsidies when the crops they plant on the rented land, fail. The rented land and failed crops count towards their bailout.
Meanwhile my friend is barely getting by because her family won't take a bailout.

I know what's going on!

In the article they stated that farms have decreased. The truth is, those smaller farms are renting their land to bigger farms. They aren't considered a farm anymore, when they rent it to others.

new topics


log in