Agricultural Subsidies: Corporate Welfare for Farmers
"The government is bailing out the banks...but who's going to bail out the government?" asks Texas cotton farmer Ken Gallaway, a vocal critic of agricultural subsidies that cost U.S. taxpayers and consumers billions of dollars a year in direct payments and higher prices for farm goods. Agricultural subsidies were put in place in the 1930s during the Great Depression, when 25 percent of Americans lived on farms. At the time, Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace called them "a temporary solution to deal with an emergency." Those programs are still in place today, even though less than 1 percent of Americans currently live on farms that are larger, more efficient, and more productive than ever before. Consider these facts. Ninety percent of all subsidies go to just five crops: corn, rice, cotton, wheat, and soybeans. Two thirds of all farm products—including perishable fruits and vegetables—receive almost no subsidies. And just 10 percent of recipients receive 75 percent of all subsidies. A program intended to be a temporary solution has become one of our governments most glaring examples of corporate welfare. U.S. taxpayers arent the only ones who pay the price. Cotton subsidies, for example, encourage overproduction which lowers the world price of cotton. Thats great for people who buy cotton, but its disastrous for already impoverished cotton farmers in places such as West Africa. U.S. farm programs cost taxpayers billions each year, significantly raise the price of commodities such as sugar (which is protected from competition from other producers in other countries), undermine world trade agreements, and contribute to the suffering of poor farmers around the world. Its bad public policy, especially in these troubled economic times. "Agricultural Subsidies: Corporate Welfare for Farmers" is hosted by Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie and is approximately 8.30 minutes long. The producer-writer is Paul Feine and the producer-editor is Roger Richards.
Comments
-
Food production is subsidised to keep down the cost of food to the U.S. consumer.Food production provides millions of jobs all across America.
-
In what distorted world are farm subsidies a necessary part of US national security?
-
I have one question.
My family has never accepted any form of farm subsidy monies, even during ol' rosies' democratic years and what ww2 did to America.
We have existed and maintained for over 90 years in America and under her demands. We have been productive (and even overproductive) over 80% of those years.
Being Native American and performing good is never spoken of.
obama came along and it simply grows worse....another FDR
Where and when are each of us resposible? -
U.S. farmers do not get subsidies. It is food production that is subsidised in order to provide everyone in the U.S. with a cheap and reliable food supply.It is a cheap food policy.Every farm is a business and every farmer a businessman.
-
The New Deal (Depression) farm policies gave farmers fair prices, which served as a private sector economic stimulus, (i.e. 1942-1952) with no need for subsidies. They were totally ended in 1996 for most crops. Prior to that they were severely reduced, and subsidies were invented to hide these facts. Farm income has been reduced by about $8 for each $1 in subsidies. US, farm prices have been below our full costs for more than 30 years, almost every year for cotton, wheat and 3 other major crops, (+1981-2006 for corn, soybeans). We chose to lose money on exports to secretly "subsidize" the multinational buyers (not US farmers). The Buyers made repeated record profits.
-
Big farmers get huge welfare checks.some get millions per year.Talk about robbing the system.They can buy and own plus receive welfare.Then sit around and talk of someone getting $300 a month.
-
Many of the larger farms are owned and operated by large corporations. Why should the corporations receive subsidies?
-
Wow finally reason.tv is putting out the dirty laundry of the hypocrite far right.
-
Since New Zealand ended their farm subsidies their farm industry has been booming. And the percentage of family farms has actually risen. Obama is a fraud.
-
The facts here are wrong. There were no subsidies in Depression era farm programs & those programs do not continue today, they ended in 1995. The basic programs don’t bail out failing farm businesses, they bail out hugely successful grain buyers by keeping prices below farmers costs most of the time. We lose on exports for them. After years of this, farmers got subsidies for covering of the losses. Your ideology of free trade makes you antibusiness, pro corporate welfare (below cost gains).
-
Agriculture Subsidies represent something like 40B$ a year out of the Federal Budget. Which comes directly out of general Tax Payer Revenue. If we forced farmers to pay Farming Insurance then we could save 40B$ a year off of our Debt.
-
A study by the University of Michigan found that if all trade barriers in agriculture, services, and manufactures were reduced by 33% as a result of the Doha Development Agenda, there would be an increase in global welfare of $574.0 billion.[47] A 2008 study by World Bank Lead Economist Kym Anderson[48] found that global income could increase by more than $3000 billion per year, $2500 billion of which would go to the developing world.
-
don't worry congress will bail government out.
-
The Depression era farm programs have been weakened since 1953, and were ended in 1996. The original programs had no subsidies for crops like corn, rice and wheat.
-
@kudzu79 but some farmers are successful and in a way you end up taxing them to give their profits to unsuccessful farmers. its largely the perspective from which you look at it that matters.
-
Earl Butz changed the way subsidies were doled out. Why ignore the huge change that led to the system we have today?
-
this guarantees us a very impotent product
-
usa doesn't want to be totally dependent on other countries for agriculture goods.usa is dependent on oil on middle east,we all know how much problem they are facing to control price of oil.
-
Small farms are inefficient; hence why they "need" subsidies. We don't need small farms, though, when we can have large farms do the same thing at a much lower cost, eliminating the need for a subsidy.
-
He's lucky he didn't get shot by some hick farmer.
8m 24sLenght
147Rating