Role Of Subsidies To Farmers

Agricultural subsidies is a very complex and controversial economic topic today. It will continue to be a hot topic as government continues it. It is largely debated in the United States as well as in other countries. The reason it is so largely debated is because it literally have an effect on the entire world market. Not to mention that the farm has been booming the last 5 to 10 years. This topic also tends to draw strong opinions in our area in particular due to the large agricultural community in our region. However, even within different states there are many supporters as well as opponents to these government subsidies.

-Mohair farmers have earned a subsidy from the federal government for decades because the mohair farmers can get large payments from the government without taxpayers ever really noticing because the farmers who get the subsidy care a lot about it, while the rest of us taxpayers (paying mere pennies extra in taxes) do not really care. And, “any politician with a preference for job security can calculate that a vote for the mohair subsidy will earn the strong support of the mohair farmers while costing nothing among other voters” (Wheelan 177).

According to VisionLaunch, people are worried about their papers full of responsibility: money. This corn fuel drives up the price of food products. This means that corn is more expensive since it is being used for fuel. It is a fact that corn is being used more for fuel than food, which is why it is more expensive. Subsidies are to help take care of that problem and reduce the amount of money corn is worth. However, there is a problem because the subsidies are funded by taxpayers which is not affecting us or

subsidies; which are grants of money that are given to the Canadian agricultural markets and

Although a 2002 agriculture law superseded many parts of FAIRA, acreage was still increased because of the growing demand for corn in animal feed, the need for corn in ethanol manufacturing, and the increased possibility to make food with corn byproducts. These seem to be good and fair reasons to focus our efforts on increasing output, however, the same issue arises: the more corn that is made, the less stable a livelihood farming becomes, regardless of the subsidies that the federal government provides.

In an effort to help boost the economy, the government provided cheap federal farm policies which allowed many people to take on the job of farming. In order to maximize profit,

In retrospect, farmers found themselves worse off because the National Recovery Administration had been very successful in forcing up prices that consumers, including farmers had to pay for manufactured goods. Unfortunately, massive government intervention in agriculture never went away.

Plenty of benefits have steamed from the implementation of subsidizations in the agriculture industry. First, farmers are receiving a more consistent income than they were before the government’s subsidies were enacted. As stated by Connect Us Fund, subsidies allow

“No cracked earth, no blistering sun, no burning wind, no grasshoppers are a permanent match for the indomitable American farmers and stockmen and their wives and children, who have carried on through desperate days and inspire us with their self-reliance, their tenacity, and their courage” (qtd. In Lookinbill 89). Thus spoke President Franklin D. Roosevelt during a broadcast campaign in Washington, D.C. in 1936 (89). By the early 1930s the nation was in the grips of the Great Depression (“We are California” 1). Millions of Americans were without food and shelter, and as well suffering to grasp hope when it comes to extreme poverty (1).

Recent cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program (S.N.A.P.), also known as the U.S. Food Stamp Program, have become extremely controversial. Whether Congress was wrong to reduce funding to the program remains a question. There are two principles that may be used to represent each side of this debate. The difference principle will be used to represent those who believe the program cuts were unjustified and the harm principle will be used to represent those who believe the program cuts were justified.

The limited income of farmers affects how much they are able to buy. To increase their income, prices of farm goods must increase. As we know the demand for farm products is low, however there is a large amount of supply. The Agricultural Adjustment Act will balance the supply and demand for farm products so that prices would support a decent purchasing power for farmers. To balance this inequality, the government will pay farmers to not plant or harvest food for a season. Farmers will be paid to halt production of corn, wheat, cotton, rice, peanuts, tobacco and milk. This will decrease the supply, hopefully enough so it will match the demand. The decrease in production will also keep farmers from accumulating more debt. The current debts of the farmers will be solved with the Farm Security Administration. With this program’s goal the lifestyles of sharecroppers, tenants, very poor landowning farmers will be improved immensely. The government will provide low-interest loans to farmers who need to pay off debts, such as their rent. Now my friends, the drought. As I said we can not change the weather, but we are smarter than the weather. I intent to established the Soil Conservation Service to help prevent further destruction of our land. Through this program, we will plant thousands of trees to break the winds that cause these terrible dust storms. The tree planting will provide jobs and benefit the ground, and ultimately,

The government paid farmers to keep a part of their land out of farming as we can see from the picture on the left. It did this for the 7 basic crops which were, corn, wheat, tobacco, rice, milk, cotton, peanuts. With many farmers participating there were some that decided not to. There were very few though since most didn’t have enough to not participate.

The United States Farm Bill is a document that contains numerous committees in agriculture which was established in 1820 in the House and then 1825 in the Senate. As a matter of fact, the U.S. Farm Bill is a multi-year document of authorizing legislation that governs agriculture, food programs, conservation, rural development, and research. Although the policies for agriculture are constantly changed by the legislation, this bill provides an opportunity for the policy makers to confirm all of the aspects and address agricultural and food issues we have today. Research shows that the U.S. Farm Bill is renewed every five years.

The Agriculture sector has changed monumentally over the past century in response to vast economic change and technological advancements. Farm subsidies are various forms of payments from the federal government put in place in an effort to stabilize prices, keep farmers in business, and ensure quality of crops. The federal government currently pays $20 billion in cash each year to US farmers and spent an estimated $250 billion between 1995-2005. Presently, a new farm bill is passed every five years

Various assessments have shared the same prime message that the rules of the Green subsidies should be changed. It is agreed upon that the subsidies in the green box have given a boost to the exports and output in agriculture, especially in the countries like the Unites states, and European States. It is exposed the way about forty to fifty percent of the exports of agriculture of countries like Unites States, Canada, and Europe rely on the continuation of the subsidies of the Green Box.