The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Random

Should American farmers continue to receive government subsidies?

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: 1 2 3 · >>
white_swan53 On October 07, 2020




n/a, New Mexico
#1New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 01:43:23
https://www.helium.com/debates/78407-should-american-farmers-continue-to-receive-government-subsidies/side_by_side?page=1


I am unsure just where this topic should be posted.

This site debates the pros and cons about government subsidies and the American farmers . What are your thoughts on the subject?
Demented On January 31, 2024




, Australia
#2New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:09:39
Our Farmers are no different,they get hand outs from the Government for everything,Fuel,In Floods when crops destroyed,In Droughts when crops destroyed. I know working on the land is hard Yakka and they deserve help at times,but we;ve also heard about the times when there to much and it's all ploughed back into the ground.
Surely the extra could be given to the REAL needy to help them survive.
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#3New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:29:37
Good article.. And lots to think about.

After reading both sides I believe that perhaps subsidies should be available, but on a case by case basis, and only for emergency situations, like flooding, or drought, or plague..
white_swan53 On October 07, 2020




n/a, New Mexico
#4New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:34:00
@Demented Said

Our Farmers are no different,they get hand outs from the Government for everything,Fuel,In Floods when crops destroyed,In Droughts when crops destroyed. I know working on the land is hard Yakka and they deserve help at times,but we;ve also heard about the times when there to much and it's all ploughed back into the ground.
Surely the extra could be given to the REAL needy to help them survive.



It was your mention of the orange grove growers in your country not being able to compete with the deal that past PM made that reminded me of this . A couple of decades ago I remember the Federal government saying their was a glut of corn and grains here and was actually paying American farmers not to plant their crops .

My granddad said he had seen it all , when that came about. He had some 'not so nice ' words for describing what he thought of the whole deal .
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#5New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:39:25
@white_swan53 Said

It was your mention of the orange grove growers in your country not being able to compete with the deal that past PM made that reminded me of this . A couple of decades ago I remember the Federal government saying their was a glut of corn and grains here and was actually paying American farmers not to plant their crops .

My granddad said he had seen it all , when that came about. He had some 'not so nice ' words for describing what he thought of the whole deal .



That's always bothered me as well. If the government wants to subsidize something, then when we have a crazy over abundance of corn or wheat, let the government buy it from farmers, and use it in the federal prison system, and the school lunch program.

If there's even more left, there are several hundred million people in other countries that would be happy to take it off our hands. Government can manage the "over supply", and farmers can actually work to grow food.
white_swan53 On October 07, 2020




n/a, New Mexico
#6New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:42:11
@boxerdc Said

Good article.. And lots to think about.

After reading both sides I believe that perhaps subsidies should be available, but on a case by case basis, and only for emergency situations, like flooding, or drought, or plague..


There you go again , thinking logically when talking about our government and the way it should work,,,

I'm just joking .


I agree that there should be funds to help in times of need . But from what the "No" side says the bigger the profit for a year the bigger the government hand out check is.

Quote:
Today, family farms netting up to $2.5 million after expenses receive fat, government checks. That's Congress' definition of a struggling family farm. The top 5% of subsidy recipients collect over 50% of the subsidies. The top 10% collect 73%. Small farms get next to nothing.
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#7New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:45:17
@white_swan53 Said

There you go again , thinking logically when talking about our government and the way it should work,,,

I'm just joking .


I agree that there should be funds to help in times of need . But from what the "No" side says the bigger the profit for a year the bigger the government hand out check is.


So, rather than throw it out, let's rework it so that it actually helps the farmers who need it, and the ones who don't need it don't get it!!
chisa96 On December 29, 2014
Supreme Goddess





Out in Nature, Wisconsin
#8New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:52:41
@boxerdc Said

So, rather than throw it out, let's rework it so that it actually helps the farmers who need it, and the ones who don't need it don't get it!!



I agree with this. The ones getting the help are the bigger farms that put out the most product already, while the actual family farms are left with minimal and spending all day every day keeping everything running and together.

Those are the farms that could use the extra funding, but they don't put out enough to be worth it so they're left to struggle their entire lives barely making a profit, if not outright losing money on a particularily crappy year.
Demented On January 31, 2024




, Australia
#9New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 02:57:19
@white_swan53 Said

It was your mention of the orange grove growers in your country not being able to compete with the deal that past PM made that reminded me of this . A couple of decades ago I remember the Federal government saying their was a glut of corn and grains here and was actually paying American farmers not to plant their crops .

My granddad said he had seen it all , when that came about. He had some 'not so nice ' words for describing what he thought of the whole deal .



Yeah I thought that may have been the case,it sounded all familiar.

I saw a video a while ago on a website that went for an hour and a bit,790meg download that I converted to DVD,and it was a real eye opener as to what goes on in the world.

Fact=,50% of all grain sold around the world goes to feeding livestock.

Fact= Dubai has the lowest rainfall of any country in the world,yet there isn't any Solar Power produced there.

This program went on to show a lot of other things that the governments of this world have done and in most cases it's just plain criminal,yet we are forced by their laws to toe the line in these things.
white_swan53 On October 07, 2020




n/a, New Mexico
#10New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:05:00
@boxerdc Said

So, rather than throw it out, let's rework it so that it actually helps the farmers who need it, and the ones who don't need it don't get it!!



I agree , that it needs to be 'reworked' to help those that need it most instead of line the pockets of those that have no need for help .
I believe this can be said for 99.9 % of government spending in America today.
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#11New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:09:04
@white_swan53 Said

I agree , that it needs to be 'reworked' to help those that need it most instead of line the pockets of those that have no need for help .
I believe this can be said for 99.9 % of government spending in America today.


And we agree again!!

Sadly, the problem lays in "who decides who needs it"? Currently it seems that the lobbyists get to make that decision.
Demented On January 31, 2024




, Australia
#12New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:10:29
If there's even more left, there are several hundred million people in other countries that would be happy to take it off our hands. Government can manage the "over supply", and farmers can actually work to grow food.



I can't disagree with you here Boxer,I'm all for feeding them and helping out,but even years ago we heard about their plight of starvation,so maybe the game should change a bit,instead of just giving,why shouldn't the organizations and countries that do all the giving get something back in return??,Something like doing something to help themselves,like learning to use the things that have been given over all those years instead of then rusting away,taking a better approach to birth control instead of bringing more babies into a world that they can't feed and having them die of starvation,covered from head to toe in flies.
I'm not talking about some kind of genocide here,but in taking a more active roll they could be helping themselves survive and getting themselves a better way of life.

To give is one thing,but to receive back is good to.
0
chisa96 On December 29, 2014
Supreme Goddess





Out in Nature, Wisconsin
#13New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:11:56
@boxerdc Said

And we agree again!!

Sadly, the problem lays in "who decides who needs it"? Currently it seems that the lobbyists get to make that decision.



And the ones that need it would never be able to sway their expensive views. Fricken sucks.
0
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#14New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:14:43
@Demented Said

I can't disagree with you here Boxer,I'm all for feeding them and helping out,but even years ago we heard about their plight of starvation,so maybe the game should change a bit,instead of just giving,why shouldn't the organizations and countries that do all the giving get something back in return??,Something like doing something to help themselves,like learning to use the things that have been given over all those years instead of then rusting away,taking a better approach to birth control instead of bringing more babies into a world that they can't feed and having them die of starvation,covered from head to toe in flies.
I'm not talking about some kind of genocide here,but in taking a more active roll they could be helping themselves survive and getting themselves a better way of life.

To give is one thing,but to receive back is good to.



That's the beauty of wheat and corn.. You can give it to people who are starving and teach them how to grow it themselves..
0
Edited: January 28, 2011 @ 03:15
Demented On January 31, 2024




, Australia
#15New Post! Jan 28, 2011 @ 03:17:22
@boxerdc Said

That's the beauty of wheat and corn.. You can give it to people who are starving and teach them how to grow it themselves..



But that's the thing,they don't grow it themselves.I feel they have become so used to handouts it's become their way of life.
0
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: 1 2 3 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
First unread post After Bashing NPR And Planned Parenthood Subsidies, Fox Now Defends Oil Subsidies
Mon May 16, 2011 @ 01:39
6 846
New posts   Jokes & Humor
First unread post The Farmers
Sun Dec 20, 2009 @ 15:55
2 456
New posts   Jokes & Humor
First unread post Two Farmers
Thu Jun 11, 2009 @ 14:12
0 336
New posts   Conspiracies
First unread post North American Union - That's What Canada Will Be Called Once Our Government Sell
Wed May 06, 2009 @ 18:22
28 4203
New posts   Jokes & Humor
First unread post Two Farmers
Thu Aug 07, 2008 @ 01:10
2 367