The U.S. national debt is rising by $1 trillion about every 100 days

At least the farmers work and provide a vital commodity for us all to consume... food for all of us, and our livestock. What point is there to keep people that don't want to work in money, and for the illegals? It's called buying votes... free money to people that will never contribute to our national economy is needed? That system needs to be fixed so that people that can work are made to earn their living.

One more thing... I rather we "give" that money in tax credits or whatever means to our farmers than to foreign nations.. We all suspect that it's nothing more than a massive money laundering racket for the elected "class" in government.

 

So you and bluke are socialist?
It has nothing to do with who you would rather give the money to. I didn't say stop subsidies and give money to xxxx instead. Don't give it to anyone, this thread is about deficit reduction.

 

You have it backwards, 93. You're the one okay with giving money to warmongering communist leaders that stifle free speech, and kill off opponents in elections like that little tyrant dictator in the Ukraine. You're okay with dissolving our sovereignty through tacit approval of open borders, and you think that government deserves taxpayers money and that somehow they are the owners of that money.

Nothing I stand for is socialist. Helping American workers and farmers is NOT an exclusively socialist tenant. We've subsidized other industries in the past and helped the American workers in need.

The only people acting like socialists are the elected people in government right now. And that means both the Pubs and the Dems. They think they have a right to live off of other people's money, and they think they're allowed to give the tax payer's money away to dictators fighting wars over seas.

 

So maybe you ought to choose somewhere else to cut spending?
There is ample waste in govt programs to choose from.

 

Apparently, this quote applies to not just the justice system but also wealth redistribution:



Apparently, there are also in-groups, to whom wealth should be redistributed and out-groups, from which wealth should be redistributed.

 

Cut most of them. Are you a conservative or not?

 

Quit rambling. We are talking about subsidies. It's a redistribution of wealth and you support it.

 

I am conservative.
I tend to support farmers and the military.

 

I do too. Again, the bulk of those subsidies are going to massive companies, not mom and pop farmer.

I have massive support for the military. We could still cut that budget.

 

The majority of farm subsidies aren't going to Ma and Pa farmer. They're going to conglomerates and megafarms:

https://www.cato.org/briefing-paper/cutting-federal-farm-subsidies#types-farm-subsidy

 

What do think we should do about that?
Seems like you are against it because these small companies grew?

 

This is true but needs to be taken into context.
If I get subsidizes on 1000 acres of crop land and the conglomerate gets subsidizes on 100,000 acres of crop land, it sure makes the dollars look like they are only going to the mega farms. I can assure the dollars going to the 1000-acre farms are needed!! Do you draw a line that you can only be so big before you get subsidized? I guess you can, but at some point, don't we have to look at good quality and availability of food sources as a national priority for the citizens and can be considered a national security issue?

 

Maybe that is why more foreign investors are starting to purchase land. Guaranteed income. Damn Canuks!

 

If you would have asked me four years ago, I would have echoed these same sentiments. But cutting the military budget now doesn't seem tenable.

 

To say that these subsidies are "for small companies to grow" is asinine. Read the linked report; the subsidies have actually created an environment that is more hostile to any that would try to enter into the business.

I'm actually against it for completely different reasons, primarily that it artificially influences markets to a major degree. One of the largest crops we grow in this country is borderline inedible corn, because farmers have basically been paid to do so for decades, with no real market or demand for the product for a long time because the government paid them more for a useless crop than the free market would pay for something else.

Which is why we have found a myriad of uses for it like corn-based ethanol in our gasoline despite it being worse for engines, livestock feed despite corn-fed meat and poultry being worse for our health, and high fructose corn syrup that's also worse for our health. We incentivized growing a glut of useless corn and then had to fund tons of research to try to find something to actually do with all of it.

That's about as "anti-conservative" as a policy can be.

 

I refer you back to the last sentence in the part of the Cato Institute paper I posted. The ten largest farms receive subsidies of 240% more per acre than the average farm.

 

i must have missed that. All I see are a bunch of so called conservatives preaching socialism. Bunch of people on these boards have the intellect to put me in my place, you and your buddies aren't among them.

 

Out? What do you mean by out?

 

Sorry, part of a multi quote.

I'm over the Atlantic, drinking.
Should prob not be posting.

 

Okay then, please just disregard what I posted... It's been deleted.