Via the Brimginham News: State farmers lobbying against cut in subsidies

The Alabama Farmers Federation opposes the cuts, noting that farm subsidies account for less than 1 percent of the entire federal budget and are critical to keeping farms in business, especially when prices drop. Their members are in Washington this week meeting with members of Congress.

If it is the case that the only thing keeping certain farms from goig out of business is government subsidies, I would argue that that is a prima facie case that those businesses are not needed, because they aren’t supported by the market, and therefore there is no need for the subsidies in question.

Further, the reason that prices often plummet is because of too much supply. Again, I submit: there is no need for these subdies. We will all have plenty of food without them.

Share on Facebook

11 Responses to “Farm Subsidies Must Go”

1. Dave Schuler Says:
   March 17th, 2005 at 12:00 pm

   Yah, I’ve posted about this recently, too. The most important reason to end farm subsidies (not just here but in the EU, too): it would give a boost to Third World agriculture. Want to eliminate extreme poverty in the world? Dump developed world agricultural subsidies.

2. Diggers Realm Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 6:17 am

   The Case For Farm Subsidies
   PoliBlog has a piece where he dismisses farm subsidies as a waste of money and that farms should be allowed to die if they aren’t profitable. Spurred by this recent article where the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture talked of cuts…

3. Steven Taylor Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 7:15 am

   Digger,

   There is no way that ending farm subsidies will result in the outsourcing of all our food production.

   And unlike oil, even if it did, we cold always just plant.

4. Digger Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 8:31 am

   Unlike Oil, you can’t just plant. Heh. If you let farmland go fallow it take a long time for it to be back up and running.

5. David Eccles Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 12:29 pm

   You both have good arugments, but I believe there’s a hidden issue here.

   Part of the reason farmers are being squeezed out of business is companies like ConAgra. These giant food companies have been slowly, quietly and surely taking over privately owned farms for years through the use of “Eminent Domain” laws. At the same time, they’ve negotiated back-door water rights deals that put private farmers and even entire cities at their mercy. With these acquisitions, they get to set the price of both water supplies as well as agricultural products.

   From where I sit, removing these farm subsidies from private farmers will only allow these big companies to come in, take the land and create a monopoly market hidden from public view. Not to mention the expansion of genetically modified food products.

   David Eccles

6. Steven Taylor Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 12:33 pm

   Private corporations cannot use eminent domain laws, nor can they just take land.

   And, exactly what is the paranoia about genetically altered foods?

7. Steven Taylor Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 12:34 pm

   Moreover, and specific to the argument over subsidies, is the fact that the corporate famrs gets the subsidies as well (indeed, they get more than do the small family farms).

8. David Eccles Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 12:48 pm

   There’s one other item I noticed about the article.

   “Already Congress is scaling back the depth of Bush’s proposed agriculture cuts. One idea is to keep some of the farm programs intact and instead carve some savings out of nutrition programs like food stamps.”

   Why do our representatives feel they can save the budget by cutting or eliminating programs which hurt the poorest of our population? Is that really what “Family Values” are all about? Just asking.

   As for genetically altered foods, the paranoia lives in the fact that at this time, no scientist can conclusively state what effects this will have on food as well as people.

   Here’s a link to a law firm in Los Angeles specializing in Eminent Domain. The section titled “What is a Public Use” is particularly telling of the current loopholes.

9. David Eccles Says:
   March 18th, 2005 at 12:49 pm

   http://www.eminentdomainlaw.net/power.html

   Here it is.

10. Steven Taylor Says:
    March 18th, 2005 at 12:59 pm

    The link makes my point: eminent domain is a power of government, not private entities.

11. David Eccles Says:
    March 18th, 2005 at 1:02 pm

    Why do you think Agriculture has lobby groups? Because they thought it would be fun?