Sad state of US AG

[marksmu]

>>1 Texas $16,229,168,781 9.1% 9.1% <<

Rice farmers in SE Texas get HUGE subsidies.

Wheat farmer get a fair bit as well.

We need to just end the subsidies COLD TURKEY.

Would be the best thing that could happen for Ag and for America!

I agree that the subsidies need to end, and let the ag world sort itself out....but until they end, a person is leaving money on the table not taking them.

I run an 800 ac place in SE Texas that before I bought it was a rice farm....we maintain a 168 acre rice base. All that is required to keep the base is to keep the property in farmable condition. We are not required to plant a crop currently. This is phasing out through 2012 though in favor of a higher subisdy for planting. By 2012 I will get nothing, which is what I deserve.

I get roughly 12,000 to let the cattle graze it, or make hay, etc. That $12,000 is on 168 acres....I could enter my whole place in it, but if you do that, you could be required to plant one year if there were a shortage, and that could be cost and time prohibitive for me.

I use the money to pay the property taxes, buy equipment, fuel and feed.
I am not proud to get it, but its there for the taking. I can guarantee you that I put that money back into the local economy MUCH faster and much more efficiently than the government ever could.

I'd rather them give the money to me, and let me make an efficient use of it, than give the money to some loser on welfare with zero desire to work, and let him waste 50% on drugs, and the rest on junk from overseas.

I dont think we need subsidies, I sure dont, but if they are there I think I am a better bet than the local welfare recipient.

 

[Ben H]

My advisor in school said the same thing, don't leave money on the table. That is why I participate in the cost shares with EQIP. They are technically a subsidy, but what I like is that that most practices are investing in the infrastructure, not a direct subsidy. I haven't done any of the planned grazing stuff. Mostly fence and water development. If you're going to spend the money, I think it's well spent. I'll fight against subsidies, but if somebody is going to get them, I want to see it well used.

 

[mrj]

Is anyone else getting concerned about Texas? I've always thought the men, most of them anyway, living there were gentlemen....yet we have some posting here who miss that designation quite a distance.

For the record: my apologies for 'multi-tasking' as I made that post.

I inadvertently stated the USDA budget exactly in reverse. FACT: the BIGGEST portion, 85%, goes to welfare food programs, NOT to farmers taking 'subsidies'.

Consumers' food cost in the USA is less than 9% of their incomes at the current time. That is no small reason for the so called farmer subsidies. That is, to enable food to be produced at low cost to consumers and keep those farmers in business, even tho their costs of producing it may be above market prices they receive.

Also for the record: we produce beef cattle, not subsidized crops. Silly of us, I know, but the land we own is pretty rugged and erodible and doesn't deserve to be turned upside down in our arid, drought prone location.
The fact is, crop subsidies allow farmer/ranchers to compete with us with their income from OUR tax dollars. That is just life in agriculture production today.


mrj

 

[marksmu]

Is anyone else getting concerned about Texas? I've always thought the men, most of them anyway, living there were gentlemen....yet we have some posting here who miss that designation quite a distance.

Also for the record: we produce beef cattle, not subsidized crops. Silly of us, I know, but the land we own is pretty rugged and erodible and doesn't deserve to be turned upside down in our arid, drought prone location.
The fact is, crop subsidies allow farmer/ranchers to compete with us with their income from OUR tax dollars. That is just life in agriculture production today.


mrj

The problem is not isolated to Texas - People in general are becoming less civilized, and the general morals of the population as a whole is declining rapidly. I hate to see it, but its happening quickly, and Im not some old phart...Im only 30 years old, and its declined greatly in my short life.

Its also unfair that we get crop subsidies that we can use on our cattle. It puts those who don't get them in a hole just starting out. While I maintain a crop base, it in no way means that I have to farm. I have only been on this piece of property 3 years, but we have never planted a thing except Rye grass for the cattle. But as I previously stated. If you dont take it, the government is just going to give it to someone else, and I am certain that I spend it more efficiently than the government can.

 

[Blkbuckaroo]

Have to agree with Ben on the Equip program,cost share on benificial projects such as conservation fencing,water improvement and such is a good way to help farmers and ranchers build useful infastructure to improve thier land base,and may have more support from the general populous.But i believe subsidies as a whole will allways be around as long as there are big corporations that are interested in buying Agricultural commodities at below cost of production.The proverbial carrot in front of the producer to go one more round,sign one more loan paper,buy one more tractor,carry one more year of debt.Would we do such without the sub safety net :???: Plentyful cheap food comes at a price.Having said that,if we were all producing direct market in our communities,would there be enough client base to go around,and would we all produce to the same standards and model or would some of us cut corners :? If we can't pay our bill's on our outfit without sub programs,what's going on, on the farm?This is not an attack on anyone,just an ingaging question.

 

[Ben H]

As many in the Ag sector try to ignore it, Blkbuckaroo has hit on almost exactly what Food Inc. was really about.