Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (17625)	4/26/2000 5:40:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

I don't doubt it. Similar stories can be found for rice and sugar production in this country ... crops controlled by amazingly powerful lobbies, and they don't have the little guy's (or consumer's!) interests at heart.

To: haqihana who wrote (17625)	4/26/2000 6:07:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

<<In the late 50s or early 60s, the subject of subsidies to wheat farmers was brought up and, my uncle being such a farmer, told me that he was against them and all of his neighbors felt the same way. They did not want the federal government to stick it's nose into their business>> Saw in the last Farm Journal that farmers in I believe in Delaware, were offered low cost federal loans because of drought. Why it made the Journal was because the program closed without any farmer applying.

To: haqihana who wrote (17625)	4/28/2000 8:51:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Haqi, you are as usual a liar. You don't even know if the imaginary incident occurred in 1950's or 1960's. Which was it? It matters a great deal because agriculture programs vary from year to year. No one has been forced to participate in subsidy programs since the 1930's, and every program which involves farmer participation is voted on by states. Even if a program is adopted, the farmer must sign up in order to participate. Many farmers choose not to participate and take the market prices they can get. Other choose to participate and get payments either for leaving land unused or loans or payments for their production. It takes a proud and thoughtful farmer not to participate, because usually there are more advantages to participating. Last year the government paid me more in crop deficiency payments than I earned from selling crops. It is true, unfortunately, that many farmers took profits from the farms in the 70's and 80's and invested in buying new farm land and borrowing to pay. Many of these farmers, especially in wheat, are doomed. A sensible, far sighted (socialist) government would have permitted the farm finance system to collapse and prevented farmers from over expansion. But government saw this as too good an opportunity to save cash and get rid of all the family farmers at once. Unfortunately, we live in a capitalistic economy. The family farmers must be driven out of business to allowed the efficient corporate corporations to maximize profits. If family farmers have stupidly expanded too much to try to become corporate farms, that's just too tough. Wecome to the New Order!