Farm subsidies are bullshit.

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by menaz, May 22, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    You know the farm security and rural investment act is a joke, Our congress is giving billions of our tax dollars to farmers. The only reason farm subsidies are popular with politicans is because big agriculture lobbies hard, and many farm states are swing states. Moreover, most farm states are so romanticized. I'm so sick of people believing without subsidies, we won't have a reliable food supply. So allow me to destory this bullshit.

    Hundreds of these farmers get our tax money through farm cotton subsidies and live in New York City. Most are not even farmers, they're real estate businesses that buy a piece of properity that got traded for a piece of property and have no clue exactly why they even received for example cotton subsides.

    See most don't know that's just how it works, Once government handouts start... it rarely stops, no matter how ridculous it gets.

    For example: Ted turner has gotten 491,179 in farm subsides. David rockefeller has gotten 524,164. And enron's ken lay got 22,486.

    Now to be honest, most farm subsidy money does go to real farms, although mostly to big agri-businessess, not the family farms all politicans romanticize over.

    However, Family farms are no better. For example: Just One family farm in california over seven years can collect up to 3.5 million dollars of our money.

    These family farms ( or as I like to call them welfare kings) like to argue their cost increase faster than prices and that subsidies are just a fraction of their income, and that without them they wouldn't beable to make a profit.

    To that I say, So what! If they can't make a profit that doesn't entitle them to our money. The truth is, Most business that can't make a profit simplely go out of business.

    For example: Woolworth closed. TWA closed. and 20,000 restaurants each year close.

    It's freedom to fail. That's what has made america as properous as it is, because it frees people to do more more productive things.

    For example: ten percent of U.S. firms go out of business each year due to mismanagement, Obsolete products, and other reasons.

    Infact, more than half of new businesses disappear within four years of being established. However, That's never allowed to happen on subsidized farms. When a family farm can't make a profit, Guess who pays? We the people pay!

    Government officals are so ignorant about markets, they have convinced themselves nothing happens unless government provides it. However, Subsidies don't maintain viable agriculture. Thus, most crops don't get subsidies.

    for example: potatoes, almonds, peaches, asparagus, carrots, lettuce, onions, tomatoes, and at least fifty other crops get no subsides.

    There are no shortages of these foods. Thus, farmers who grow them manage to thrive without feeding off us the taxpayers.

    for example: In 1989, New Zealand eliminated farm subsides cold turkey. The changes met fierce resistance. However, farm productivity, profitability, and output soared since the reforms.

    Even the federated farmers of New Zealand stated: The experience throughly debunked the myth that the farming sector cannot prosper without government subsidies. Yet these family farms in America claim they can't survive without subsidies? BULLSHIT!

    These family farms also like to cry about how their cotton business would go to china. To that I say good, give it to china, Lets get cheap cotton from those places and stop throwing millions of dollars of our money at welfare kings.

    Think about it, In 1900... America had six million farms, and agriculture department employed 3,000 people. Today there are only two millon
    farms, However the department employs 100,000 people. Well, at this
    rate it seems logical to me that there will be more bureaucrats than farmers
    soon.

    The Truth is: Subsidies raise the price of cotton. Which makes clothing manufacturers want to buy foregin cotton, but since that would hurt american farmers, government restricts imports. This wrecks the lives of poor farmers worldwide, because they can't sell their cotton in America. So to make up for that congress then spends billions more on foreign aid, and then billions more on another subsidy to american manufacturers so that they can afford to buy the expensive American cotton.(Thus, One bad policy on top of another.)

    I'm simplely asking for government to limit itself, and get out of the way of what the free-markets needs or doesn't want.
    test
  2. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    you were never a marxist in the first place......

    so you didn't respond in the other thread...is John Rockefeller your hero?
    test
  3. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I was a Marxist, But then I realized after more studing i'm actually a classical libertian. The Great thing about a free-society is I'm allowed to change my mind.

    Not a big fan of John rockefeller, More of a Alexander hamilton kind of guy.
    I didn't actually think that was a serious question. I found it
    sort of off topic which is why I probably didn't answer it.

    Alexander hamilton: It's not tyranny we desire; it's a just, limited, federal government.
    test
  4. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    but why not rockefeller...

    that's a guy who reaped ALL of the benefits provided by an economy with zero government influence...
    test
  5. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Just not a big fan.
    test
  6. Now read up on modern nation's who have watched their agriculture go belly up from free market practices.

    And then watch nation's go belly up as they attempt collective farming.

    It's a touchy subject.
    test
  7. MC Bill Buckner

    MC Bill Buckner New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    4,990
    personally i would love to receive govt money to NOT grow specific crops.

    however true farmers are not making bank off govmt subsidies.
    test
  8. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807

    They are banking up to 3.5 million dollars of your tax money because of government subsidies.

    I just explained this.

    And the problem with this is what? I made it quite clear, Those who can not compete will fail. Or better yet turn to outsourcing. There are plenty of other farm products that aren't subsidized and farmers do just fine. You like your income going to welfare kings? You like paying more for those products?


    I'm going to say, Lenin, 6 million deaths.
    test
  9. And this is the one business on earth that cannot fail for the sake of stable economics. When you are a nation that controls as much land as we do (China, India, Russia) you have to be self-sufficient -because- one of your prime exports is food.

    Russia, during their experiments with communal farming that everyone hailed as the new savior, Stalin was bumming food off of China. Of course, Mao didn't care if it left his people starving, he just wanted to trade Chinese food for Russian industrial technology.
    test
  10. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    However, cotton isn't a food it is a heavy subsudy. The peach farmers and plum famers don't take subsidies. Therefore, food remains self-sufficient.

    since 1992, america has lost 391 million jobs. but during those same years america created 411 million jobs. 20 million more than we lost.


    Mao wasn't about free-market. Mao was about Mao's interests.

    Moving on, What are your thoughts on sweat shops, Pro or anti?
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)