4 ms·
On the other hand, if no other farmers are helped with grants, then the price of food would increase and they might not need help from the government. It might
by Mirioron 7y ago
On the other hand, if no other farmers are helped with grants, then the price of food would increase and they might not need help from the government. It might not be as illogical for them to not like help from the government while at the same time being helped.
- EliRivers 7y ago"On the other hand, if no other farmers are helped with grants" No other farmers? What are you talking about? I'm not talking about farmers. Who's talking about farmers? The USDA does an awful lot more than giving grants to farmers. An awful lot more. In some cases, rural communities would be without water and electricity without USDA grants. They subsidise school meals for poor children. They help people pay their rent. They are the source of food stamps under SNAP. They help people in rural areas get a mortgage to buy a house. They are so much more than grants to farmers, and they keep it quiet. They are effectively a rolling system of government assistance to some of the poorest and most cut-off communities in the US.
- Mirioron 7y agoI did not know that. I figured that the USDA only dealt with agriculture.