3 ms·

I've always wondered about this argument in an environment suffering from an obesity epidemic, often blamed on another corn product, high-fructose corn syrup.

I've always wondered about this argument in an environment suffering from an obesity epidemic, often blamed on another corn product, high-fructose corn syrup. Having lived in many different countries, the cost of food in the US is incredibly low. I assume (and have heard) this is mostly a result of subsidies to farmers. All the while, US exports of 'corn based products', which I assume is also corn, has continued to grow http://www.fas.usda.gov/data/us-exports-corn-based-products-continue-climb http://www.fas.usda.gov/data/us-exports-corn-based-products-....

guscost 12y ago
This is an important point, American farm output is strongly manipulated by other subsidies and regulations. But I don't think there's any reason to believe that rising domestic corn prices would not have an effect on the larger domestic and foreign food markets, or that the effect would be good.
eastbayjake 12y ago
I'm hopeful that normalized relations with Cuba will be the end of our crazy corn subsidies. If you want to make ethanol, sugarcane is 7x more energy efficient in producing ethanol compared to corn, and you can produce twice as much ethanol from an acre of sugarcane as an acre of corn[1]. And if you want to sweeten food and beverages, the same energy efficiency applies to cane sugar harvesting: you can get more sugar with less harvesting energy per acre of sugarcane than corn. (Although there's little science supporting cane sugar being healthier than high-fructose corn syrup.) It seems like the Cuba detente has broken a constituent stalemate in Congress: a small group of Florida sugarcane farmers corner the market on US cane sugar and no one has wanted to normalize relations and import sugarcane from Cuba because of those farmers' political clout, even though our countries' comparative advantage should dictate growing sugarcane in poor, developing Cuba and exporting it for food and ethanol use in the US.[2] There's been a gentlemen's agreement among senators that props up these farm subsidies because no one wants to rock the boat and jeopardize their own state's subsidies, but California is pushing back as our farmers get hammered by drought and Florida now has little to lose for opposing Midwestern farmers' lucrative corn subsidies. [1] https://biowesleyan.wordpress.com/first-generation-biofuels/ethanol/case-study-brazil/sugarcane-vs-corn-based-ethanol/ https://biowesleyan.wordpress.com/first-generation-biofuels/... [2] http://fcir.org/2012/09/09/in-sugar-price-supports-sour-tastes-for-consumers/ http://fcir.org/2012/09/09/in-sugar-price-supports-sour-tast...
- bottled_poe 12y ago
  This comment provides so much insight into an issue I know very little about. Just thought an up vote was not enough here. Thank you.
- cplease 12y ago
  Very unlikely. The USA sugar policy is older than the corn policy, why would trade with Cuba change that just because it's one of their agricultural products? Cuba is not even in the top ten cane producers, and more to the point, the USA alone produces over 15 times as much cane as Cuba. Brazil, which has bilateral free trade agreements with the USA, produces well over 400 times as much cane as Cuba. What leads you to believe that lifting some sanctions against Cuba would do anything to change US sugar policy?
- pjc50 12y ago
  I'd always thought that the Cuban stalemate lasted so long as enough of the refugees from the revolution were alive and active in Florida politics, I hadn't realised there was a subsidy dimension to it as well.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Corn subsidies will end when electric vehicles begin to put a dent in gasoline consumption in the US.
  - pedalpete 12y ago
    I think corn subsidies have a lot to do with food, and corn-ethanol producers are piggybacking on that subsidy rather than driving it.
adventured 12y ago
Between 1950 and 2000, corn production per acre in the US increased nearly 300%. Population increased 86%. Subsidies do play a role, however American farm productivity is among the highest of any country and has skyrocketed in the last 50 to 60 years. This is due to technology, organization structure, and a geography favorable to nearly every type of farming. Few countries have all of those things, along with the world's largest consumer and capital markets. Three million US farmers produce so much food they can feed not only all 320 million Americans, but also export a vast amount of food.
rhino369 12y ago
It's not caused by the direct subsidies. Things like ethanol requirements in gas and the HFCS favoritism drive up the cost of the food. Ethanol by increasing demand for corn. The reason America uses corn syrup is because the government has a high tariff on cane sugar imports. So America pays twice the global rate for sugar.

guscost 12y ago

This is an important point, American farm output is strongly manipulated by other subsidies and regulations. But I don't think there's any reason to believe that rising domestic corn prices would not have an effect on the larger domestic and foreign food markets, or that the effect would be good.

eastbayjake 12y ago

I'm hopeful that normalized relations with Cuba will be the end of our crazy corn subsidies. If you want to make ethanol, sugarcane is 7x more energy efficient in producing ethanol compared to corn, and you can produce twice as much ethanol from an acre of sugarcane as an acre of corn[1]. And if you want to sweeten food and beverages, the same energy efficiency applies to cane sugar harvesting: you can get more sugar with less harvesting energy per acre of sugarcane than corn. (Although there's little science supporting cane sugar being healthier than high-fructose corn syrup.) It seems like the Cuba detente has broken a constituent stalemate in Congress: a small group of Florida sugarcane farmers corner the market on US cane sugar and no one has wanted to normalize relations and import sugarcane from Cuba because of those farmers' political clout, even though our countries' comparative advantage should dictate growing sugarcane in poor, developing Cuba and exporting it for food and ethanol use in the US.[2] There's been a gentlemen's agreement among senators that props up these farm subsidies because no one wants to rock the boat and jeopardize their own state's subsidies, but California is pushing back as our farmers get hammered by drought and Florida now has little to lose for opposing Midwestern farmers' lucrative corn subsidies. [1] https://biowesleyan.wordpress.com/first-generation-biofuels/ethanol/case-study-brazil/sugarcane-vs-corn-based-ethanol/ https://biowesleyan.wordpress.com/first-generation-biofuels/... [2] http://fcir.org/2012/09/09/in-sugar-price-supports-sour-tastes-for-consumers/ http://fcir.org/2012/09/09/in-sugar-price-supports-sour-tast...

bottled_poe 12y ago
This comment provides so much insight into an issue I know very little about. Just thought an up vote was not enough here. Thank you.
cplease 12y ago
Very unlikely. The USA sugar policy is older than the corn policy, why would trade with Cuba change that just because it's one of their agricultural products? Cuba is not even in the top ten cane producers, and more to the point, the USA alone produces over 15 times as much cane as Cuba. Brazil, which has bilateral free trade agreements with the USA, produces well over 400 times as much cane as Cuba. What leads you to believe that lifting some sanctions against Cuba would do anything to change US sugar policy?
pjc50 12y ago
I'd always thought that the Cuban stalemate lasted so long as enough of the refugees from the revolution were alive and active in Florida politics, I hadn't realised there was a subsidy dimension to it as well.
toomuchtodo 12y ago
Corn subsidies will end when electric vehicles begin to put a dent in gasoline consumption in the US.
- pedalpete 12y ago
  I think corn subsidies have a lot to do with food, and corn-ethanol producers are piggybacking on that subsidy rather than driving it.

adventured 12y ago

Between 1950 and 2000, corn production per acre in the US increased nearly 300%. Population increased 86%. Subsidies do play a role, however American farm productivity is among the highest of any country and has skyrocketed in the last 50 to 60 years. This is due to technology, organization structure, and a geography favorable to nearly every type of farming. Few countries have all of those things, along with the world's largest consumer and capital markets. Three million US farmers produce so much food they can feed not only all 320 million Americans, but also export a vast amount of food.

rhino369 12y ago

It's not caused by the direct subsidies. Things like ethanol requirements in gas and the HFCS favoritism drive up the cost of the food. Ethanol by increasing demand for corn. The reason America uses corn syrup is because the government has a high tariff on cane sugar imports. So America pays twice the global rate for sugar.