• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Corn crop, prices etc

Angus 62 said:
Federal crop insurance isn't revenue neutral and hasn't been for some time. Taxpayers subsidize around 62% of premium costs. Last year it cost taxpayers in excess of 14 billion and the year before in excess of 11 billion when all costs are included. This transfer of wealth (read socialism) is why land is bringing what it is bringing and corn is grown in places it never should be. This will only perpetuate itself which is what all giverment programs do.
Click to expand...

By federal statute it is to be revenue neutral but over the last 10 years over 400 billion has been other wise spent so the reserve was gone. Send the bureaucrats that spent the money to jail where they belong and this will stop. I would like to see my premium if it were subsidized as it has held in the $110,000 to $125,000 each year - - - if this were a private insurance company they would have to be accountable - - - and no I was not ashamed to take the check last year even though it took several months and years of records before they paid up. Records they have had on file all this time but we had to reproduce due to their incompetence.

I paid just over $120,000 again this spring and hope to not get a return but someone in other areas should end up with it and that is fine with me I will pay again next year and pray to not have a claim.

If you do not have to have an operating loan then you have the option of not paying for insurance and you also have the option of what level you insure for - - - I take the max which supposedly pays at 90% of what I would have made and we keep records field by field so that if one of the farms ( spread over about 20 miles ) does better or worse than the rest we can prove what the history on each individual field is. Many do not go to the work involved in doing so but my daughter-in-law keeps everything down to the bushel - - - I cannot combine a field and have a 1/2 full truck and start the next field without weighing the truck in between and every bushel gets weighed before going to the bins.

Some people chose to not have insurance on their homes or cars and that is fine till something happens and they want the government to bail them out. I chose to pay for insurance ( I have high deductibles to keep low premiums )

When Federal crop insurance is the only game in town you have no choice as to where you get insurance. If you don't like that the federal government spend money in violation of federal statutes vote the bums out!
 
Federal crop is neutral. For the insurance companies. In 2011 premiums paid in we're 11.9 billion losses paid out were 10.6 billion. Or just call it 11 billion paid out. That's almost a billion dollar profit for the insurance companies. But all some of you see is 11 billion paid out in federal crop claims and get your panties in a bunch. The farmer isn't getting rich off this insurance the companies that sell it are. That's why every Tom dick and Harry comes around trying to sell crop insurance because its easy money for them.
 
Actually

when you look at all the data and not just the part you want to look at--Federal Crop Insurance adds substantially to the coffers of the government.

True, the premium is subsidized-- I wont argue that--- but who do you think ends up with the money?????????? The government buys the risk back in exchange for a substantial portion of the premiums and issues reinsurance to the crop insurance companies. Because of the reinsurance gain-- federal crop insurance has actually been profitable for the government over the last 12 years.

But you dont have to believe me-- Call Art Barnaby, @ I believe KSU, he has been one of the primary authors of crop insurance and has the data to back that up.

AND I dont know ANYONE that is getting 62% of the premium paid--with the exception of those carrying CAT coverage, and some of the socially disadvantaged-- so perhaps that includes some of the people in Colorado that bench and complain about crop insurance every opportunity they get.

FWIW-- almost no one carries CATastrophic coverage-- it simply isnt worth the effort, and the number of Socially disadvantaged policies that are written arent worth the time of discussion.
 
There's an old saying, ''Don't piss down my neck and tell me it's raining." The $14 billion in government costs comes directly from USDA's Risk Management Agency's website. Last year FCI paid out over of $5.37 billion in payments over what they collected in premiums. There was a $7.149 billion subsidy and over a billion dollars in related government expense. Again directly from the graphs on USDA's website.
 
George said:
Angus 62 said:
Federal crop insurance isn't revenue neutral and hasn't been for some time. Taxpayers subsidize around 62% of premium costs. Last year it cost taxpayers in excess of 14 billion and the year before in excess of 11 billion when all costs are included. This transfer of wealth (read socialism) is why land is bringing what it is bringing and corn is grown in places it never should be. This will only perpetuate itself which is what all giverment programs do.
Click to expand...

By federal statute it is to be revenue neutral but over the last 10 years over 400 billion has been other wise spent so the reserve was gone. Send the bureaucrats that spent the money to jail where they belong and this will stop. I would like to see my premium if it were subsidized as it has held in the $110,000 to $125,000 each year - - - if this were a private insurance company they would have to be accountable - - - and no I was not ashamed to take the check last year even though it took several months and years of records before they paid up. Records they have had on file all this time but we had to reproduce due to their incompetence.

I paid just over $120,000 again this spring and hope to not get a return but someone in other areas should end up with it and that is fine with me I will pay again next year and pray to not have a claim.

If you do not have to have an operating loan then you have the option of not paying for insurance and you also have the option of what level you insure for - - - I take the max which supposedly pays at 90% of what I would have made and we keep records field by field so that if one of the farms ( spread over about 20 miles ) does better or worse than the rest we can prove what the history on each individual field is. Many do not go to the work involved in doing so but my daughter-in-law keeps everything down to the bushel - - - I cannot combine a field and have a 1/2 full truck and start the next field without weighing the truck in between and every bushel gets weighed before going to the bins.

Some people chose to not have insurance on their homes or cars and that is fine till something happens and they want the government to bail them out. I chose to pay for insurance ( I have high deductibles to keep low premiums )

When Federal crop insurance is the only game in town you have no choice as to where you get insurance. If you don't like that the federal government spend money in violation of federal statutes vote the bums out!
Click to expand...


"Some people chose to not have insurance on their homes or cars and that is fine till something happens and they want the government to bail them out"

or their neighbors. so and so's house burnt down, they lost everything and no insurance---can you help?

so and so got cancer----really a rackin' up the bills---and no insurance---can you help?

You bet. Let me balance my checkbook---just paid ranch insurance, house insurance, vehicle insurance, health insurance----let me see what's left to help you out.
 
Angus 62 said:
Federal crop insurance isn't revenue neutral and hasn't been for some time. Taxpayers subsidize around 62% of premium costs. Last year it cost taxpayers in excess of 14 billion and the year before in excess of 11 billion when all costs are included. This transfer of wealth (read socialism) is why land is bringing what it is bringing and corn is grown in places it never should be. This will only perpetuate itself which is what all giverment programs do.
Click to expand...

If your calculations are correct then the $116,000 premium I paid would have been $305,263 or about 1/3rd of my crop expense - - - that would mean I would need a total failure one year out of every 6 to make it worth while. I will let you decide weather to buy insurance or not but I feel it should be private companies not government but congress does not see it my way.

When you shell out over $1,000,000 in seed and fert and other related cost without borrowing any money to do it then you can chose for yourself until then quite crying that I chose to keep insured - - - I consider crop insurance a needed evil but I cannot afford to chance it!

If pasture insurance was available I would look into that to - - - I liquidated over 1/2 of my herd several years ago when we had not pasture or hay but the rains came at the right time for the row crops. About 20 years ago when there was a severe drought in the south I donated 3 semi loads of hay to help out many people I did not know but no one sent any back to me when I had no pasture.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top