4 ms·
> If the economics are an issue, then selective use of farm subsidies are appropriate given the positive value being added to the land in terms of increased pr
by bradleyjg 7y ago
> If the economics are an issue, then selective use of farm subsidies are appropriate given the positive value being added to the land in terms of increased productivity and soil quality.
Wait, what? If the farmer’s asset is getting more valuable how is that an argument for public subsidies?
- undersuit 7y agoFarmer's are going to plant what's profitable, not what's going to feed the nation in six months. Subsidies can allow the government to incentivize for feeding the nation, or as crop insurance when we consistently grow too much corn and want to play chemist.
- bradleyjg 7y agoHow many cycles of spikes in demand six months out does it take to develop a futures market that spikes six months out and makes planting what's going to feed the nation in six months profitable today? Besides which, I don't see any danger in Americans starving. We export enormous quantities of food and many food crops are, when you get right down to it, substitutes. I see zero reason to continue subsiding agriculture--big, small, cash crop, heirloom vegetable, dairy, or anything else. Whether through cash, subsidized insurance, water policy, protectionist measures, or anything else. Let the chips fall where they may.
- jelliclesfarm 7y agoSubsidies must end. In the USA, subsidies are for commodity crops traded in Wall Street. Not for our food. A vast majority of it goes to feed too, but factory farms and CAFOs shouldn’t be encouraged anyways.