[Stardust]

Guy's, debate is awesome and anyone who know's me know's that I love to argue. But keep this thread about the topic. Do not take personal shots in the threads. If you want to have civilized fights, do it in PM's.

[Stardust]

You tell me. These "American farmers" (which probably have illegal immigrants working them) said they would take it simply because it's offered. If the restaurant you go to eat at offers you a free dessert, would you turn it down? Probably not, because it would atleast provide a little bit of value to you.

The difference is that if I sat on the right, I would be appreciative and let it be known that it was not expected nor a requirement of my frequent of your establishment.

If I sat on the left, I'd expect that just because I ate in your restaraunt, you "Owe" me that free desert and I will accept nothing less than you take care of my wants.

[ukyfootball]

The difference is that if I sat on the right, I would be appreciative and let it be known that it was not expected nor a requirement of my frequent of your establishment

If I sat on the left, I'd expect that just because I ate in your restaraunt, you "Owe" me that free desert and I will accept nothing less than you take care of my wants.

Thats true, but you would probably still take it as long as the dessert adds value. But on that topic, this really isnt a discussion over "left" and "right" wing policies. Both parties typically support farm subsidies, while economists, libertarians, and independents do not

[vundy33]

My bad brother, no need for personal shots. :Thumbs:

I wouldn't say I was uneducated...I got a year of college in before the troop surge in AFG. Most topics I know a bit about, but I have to agree with you on this one, I'm learning as I read. You wouldn't believe how much I've learned reading the threads on this forum.

[Stardust]

Thats true, but you would probably still take it as long as the dessert adds value. But on that topic, this really isnt a discussion over "left" and "right" wing policies. Both parties typically support farm subsidies, while economists, libertarians, and independents do not

If I had a steak that was just perfect and it completely satisfied my ****er, the addition of a free dessert would add ZERO value to the meal! So unless I am missing something, I don't understand the term "Value" in this thread.

[ukyfootball]

If I had a steak that was just perfect and it completely satisfied my ****er, the addition of a free dessert would add ZERO value to the meal! So unless I am missing something, I don't understand the term "Value" in this thread.

Ok, that was a bad example. The variable was the you are not full. Using it along these lines though, the farms are not "full." They are already making profits, the subsidies just increase them.

[Captain Backdoor]

Ok, that was a bad example. The variable was the you are not full. Using it along these lines though, the farms are not "full." They are already making profits, the subsidies just increase them.

I just dont understand who "THEY" is? from the article with that video looks to me like they found the biggest farmer in Nebraska and asked him what he thought of this. Yes I will agree that the bigger farmers are making an extraordinary amount of money off of this. However they need to look at the smaller scale farmer. I'll give you a perfect example. I am very good friend with a local dairyman in Western Pulaski County. He raises his own cows, raises his own corn (both for silage and shelling) He produces Grade A milk, milks about 70 head of cows twice a day. THe only benefit from his corn that he grows is that he has enough money to pay his bills and put food on his table. Southern Belle buys his milk at 15.00 for every 100 LBS of milk his cows produce now that has just been raised to 15.00 about a month ago. It was 12.00 for 2 years. Now if you remember back about 2 years ago when we had the drought his corn was only about knee high. Needless to say he had to chop every bit of his corn just to be able to feed his cows. He didn't have any corn to shell so that he could grind to feed the cows while he was milking. If it was not for the subsidies kicking in he would be up the preverbial $hi* creek. Its not just the corn producers that are getting subsidies. Its anything that has to do with agriculture: Corn, soybeans, peanuts, wheat, ETC...

[Beetle01]

So after all of these posts very little has been discussed as to why corn, wheat, and soybean are subsidized in this country. The first thing I am going to tell you is it is not to increase the profits of the farmers.

It is so the huge and powerful handful of food companies in this country/world can buy the corn at less than cost. They are even feeding it to the cattle now, which has brought about the new strain of e-coli which has caused dozens of deaths in the USA.

Corporate greed has gotten out of control, they willingly put Americans and people around the world at risk for profit. It happens more and more.

Corn is so cheap in America, it has put 2.5 million Mexican farmers out of jobs due to NAFTA. Its cheaper to ship corn from America to Mexico, than it is to grow it there. That should never happen.

So now these food companies hire these illegals for cheap wages, putting them in unsafe working conditions, and use the threats to keep them quiet about what they do to our food.

[ukyfootball]

I just dont understand who "THEY" is? from the article with that video looks to me like they found the biggest farmer in Nebraska and asked him what he thought of this. Yes I will agree that the bigger farmers are making an extraordinary amount of money off of this. However they need to look at the smaller scale farmer. I'll give you a perfect example. I am very good friend with a local dairyman in Western Pulaski County. He raises his own cows, raises his own corn (both for silage and shelling) He produces Grade A milk, milks about 70 head of cows twice a day. THe only benefit from his corn that he grows is that he has enough money to pay his bills and put food on his table. Southern Belle buys his milk at 15.00 for every 100 LBS of milk his cows produce now that has just been raised to 15.00 about a month ago. It was 12.00 for 2 years. Now if you remember back about 2 years ago when we had the drought his corn was only about knee high. Needless to say he had to chop every bit of his corn just to be able to feed his cows. He didn't have any corn to shell so that he could grind to feed the cows while he was milking. If it was not for the subsidies kicking in he would be up the preverbial $hi* creek. Its not just the corn producers that are getting subsidies. Its anything that has to do with agriculture: Corn, soybeans, peanuts, wheat, ETC...

So he should be subsidized every year??? :HitWall: No, they shouldnt be.

But on that note, you have to expect something like that to happen when your money deals with weather. Its a high risk job with not a whole bunch of rewards.

[Captain Backdoor]

So he should be subsidized every year??? :HitWall: No, they shouldnt be.

But on that note, you have to expect something like that to happen when your money deals with weather. Its a high risk job with not a whole bunch of rewards.

Your still not getting it :HitWall::HitWall: Even with 15.00 milk he is breaking even it cost him 400.00 an acre to just plant the corn thats not including the chemicals it cost to fertilize and spray it with.

[Beetle01]

Your still not getting it :HitWall::HitWall: Even with 15.00 milk he is breaking even it cost him 400.00 an acre to just plant the corn thats not including the chemicals it cost to fertilize and spray it with.

He cant make a living off corn, because 1) its value has been decreased so greatly that companies can buy it at cost or less. 2) The supply/demand is out of balance, we went from farming 20bushels/acre to over 200 bushels/acre in the last 20yrs. Not to mention that about 20% of our land in American is used for corn farming.

[Beetle01]

I just dont understand who "THEY" is? from the article with that video looks to me like they found the biggest farmer in Nebraska and asked him what he thought of this. Yes I will agree that the bigger farmers are making an extraordinary amount of money off of this. However they need to look at the smaller scale farmer. I'll give you a perfect example. I am very good friend with a local dairyman in Western Pulaski County. He raises his own cows, raises his own corn (both for silage and shelling) He produces Grade A milk, milks about 70 head of cows twice a day. THe only benefit from his corn that he grows is that he has enough money to pay his bills and put food on his table. Southern Belle buys his milk at 15.00 for every 100 LBS of milk his cows produce now that has just been raised to 15.00 about a month ago. It was 12.00 for 2 years. Now if you remember back about 2 years ago when we had the drought his corn was only about knee high. Needless to say he had to chop every bit of his corn just to be able to feed his cows. He didn't have any corn to shell so that he could grind to feed the cows while he was milking. If it was not for the subsidies kicking in he would be up the preverbial $hi* creek. Its not just the corn producers that are getting subsidies. Its anything that has to do with agriculture: Corn, soybeans, peanuts, wheat, ETC...

Tell your friend thanks for helping spread one of the deadliest food borne illnesses in America. Please inform him cattle are grass eaters, they are not made to eat corn.

[Captain Backdoor]

Tell your friend thanks for helping spread one of the deadliest food borne illnesses in America. Please inform him cattle are grass eaters, they are not made to eat corn.

Better yet why don't you tell that to every farmer in America..... I'm guessing that you are a vegetarian huh?

[Captain Backdoor]

He cant make a living off corn, because 1) its value has been decreased so greatly that companies can buy it at cost or less. 2) The supply/demand is out of balance, we went from farming 20bushels/acre to over 200 bushels/acre in the last 20yrs. Not to mention that about 20% of our land in American is used for corn farming.

He's not making his living off of corn...what he is making his living at is milking...without the corn the cows do not eat if the cows do not eat the cows do not produce milk....see this is a chain effect.

[Beetle01]

Better yet why don't you tell that to every farmer in America..... I'm guessing that you are a vegetarian huh?

LOL no, I love meat.

However, just because every farmer in America does it, doesnt mean its right, or the best thing to do. I guess though when little kids die from the e-coli, its okay though, because, well everyone is doing it.

COWS ARE GRASS EATERS, is he unable to obtain the proper food for his dairy cattle?

[ukyfootball]

Your still not getting it :HitWall::HitWall: Even with 15.00 milk he is breaking even it cost him 400.00 an acre to just plant the corn thats not including the chemicals it cost to fertilize and spray it with.

Then common sense tells us not to plant the corn. If you know youre not going to make money off of something...then dont try and undertake such actions. The subsidies are a bunch of :flush:

[Captain Backdoor]

LOL no, I love meat.

However, just because every farmer in America does it, doesnt mean its right, or the best thing to do. I guess though when little kids die from the e-coli, its okay though, because, well everyone is doing it.

COWS ARE GRASS EATERS, is he unable to obtain the proper food for his dairy cattle?

Ok what are pigs and chickens supposed to eat??? E-coli will be killed if the meat is cooked properly. E-Coli stems from uncooked food. Cattle are herbivores that consist of forages (grass and hay) and roughages (Silage IE..corn and wheat) Unless you can produce the evidence that corn creates E-Coli I am not buying into that. In case you didn't know roughages actually help the cows survive. The cobs from the corn actually scratch the linings of the cattles stomach and relases the bacteria that help digest the Grasses and corn that the cow consumes.

[Captain Backdoor]

Then common sense tells us not to plant the corn. If you know youre not going to make money off of something...then dont try and undertake such actions. The subsidies are a bunch of :flush:

If you don't plant the corn then what are you going to feed them?

[ukyfootball]

Grass. :Cheerlead

[Beetle01]

Ok what are pigs and chickens supposed to eat??? E-coli will be killed if the meat is cooked properly. E-Coli stems from uncooked food. Cattle are herbivores that consist of forages (grass and hay) and roughages (Silage IE..corn and wheat) Unless you can produce the evidence that corn creates E-Coli I am not buying into that. In case you didn't know roughages actually help the cows survive. The cobs from the corn actually scratch the linings of the cattles stomach and relases the bacteria that help digest the Grasses and corn that the cow consumes.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli"]Escherichia coli[/ame], although considered to be part of the normal [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_flora"]gut flora[/ame] for many mammals (including [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_flora"]humans[/ame]), has many strains. Strain E. coli 0157:H7 is associated with human illness (and sometimes death) as a [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foodborne_illness"]foodborne illness[/ame]. A study by Cornell University [22] has determined that grass-fed animals have as much as 80% less of this strain of E. coli in their guts than their grain-fed counterparts, though this reduction can be achieved by switching an animal to grass only a few days prior to slaughter. Also, the amount of E. coli they do have is much less likely to survive our first-line defense against infection: [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastric_acid"]stomach acid[/ame]. This is because feeding grain to cattle makes their digestive tract abnormally [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid"]acidic[/ame]; over time, the pathogenic E. coli becomes acid-resistant.[23] If humans ingest this acid-resistant E. coli via grain-feed beef, a large number of them may survive past the stomach, causing an infection.[24] A study by the USDA Meat and Animal Research Center in Lincoln Nebraska (2000) has confirmed the Cornell research.

From wiki.

[ukyfootball]

So after all of these posts very little has been discussed as to why corn, wheat, and soybean are subsidized in this country. The first thing I am going to tell you is it is not to increase the profits of the farmers.

It is so the huge and powerful handful of food companies in this country/world can buy the corn at less than cost. They are even feeding it to the cattle now, which has brought about the new strain of e-coli which has caused dozens of deaths in the USA.

Corporate greed has gotten out of control, they willingly put Americans and people around the world at risk for profit. It happens more and more.

Corn is so cheap in America, it has put 2.5 million Mexican farmers out of jobs due to NAFTA. Its cheaper to ship corn from America to Mexico, than it is to grow it there. That should never happen.

So now these food companies hire these illegals for cheap wages, putting them in unsafe working conditions, and use the threats to keep them quiet about what they do to our food.

Although I agree with 99% of this, some of the subsidies are to increase profits. Yes, they are to also lower the price, but this is also big politics at work.

[Hoot Gibson]

Although I agree with 99% of this, some of the subsidies are to increase profits. Yes, they are to also lower the price, but this is also big politics at work.

Increasing income while keeping costs steady will always maximize profits (or minimize losses), depending on the sales price, regardless of whether that additional income is in the form of subsidies or sales. The purpose of government subsidies is not to lower prices but to allow our farmers to compete at a lower price point.

The main objective of subsidies is to allow incumbent politicians to buy votes for their own reelection.

[ukyfootball]

Youre right, thats why I said "some" and you said "most." This can go hand in hand though. Increasing profits through subsidies is a form of buying votes.

[Hoot Gibson]

Youre right, thats why I said "some" and you said "most." This can go hand in hand though. Increasing profits through subsidies is a form of buying votes.

All subsidies increase profits or reduce losses. The only thing that determines whether the increased revenue of subsidies results in a bigger profit or a smaller loss is the price that the market sets and corporate greed has nothing to do with it. Politicians like to accuse corporations of greed because it takes the focus off of the truly greedy ones leveling the accusations.

[ukyfootball]

Spot on.

[Beetle01]

The subsidies are not increasing profits for farmers. In fact it is actually the only profit they make, as corn is sold at or below cost.

Of course, we could do away with the subsidies, which is something I am unsure on where I stand, but the price of corn will sky rocket, and our food costs will go through the roof, I doubt many of you truly understand how many products in your local grocery store use some form of corn based ingredient as a key ingredient. That doesnt even take into account the fact that it is used as the main feed for our meat.

[Captain Backdoor]

The subsidies are not increasing profits for farmers. In fact it is actually the only profit they make, as corn is sold at or below cost.

Of course, we could do away with the subsidies, which is something I am unsure on where I stand, but the price of corn will sky rocket, and our food costs will go through the roof, I doubt many of you truly understand how many products in your local grocery store use some form of corn based ingredient as a key ingredient. That doesnt even take into account the fact that it is used as the main feed for our meat.

Thank you Beetle. This is the point that I have been trying to get across.

[ukyfootball]

The subsidies are not increasing profits for farmers. In fact it is actually the only profit they make, as corn is sold at or below cost.

Of course, we could do away with the subsidies, which is something I am unsure on where I stand, but the price of corn will sky rocket, and our food costs will go through the roof, I doubt many of you truly understand how many products in your local grocery store use some form of corn based ingredient as a key ingredient. That doesnt even take into account the fact that it is used as the main feed for our meat.

This is not true. More corn will be grown (the government still pays for peeps not to grow corn), resulting in more supply. This will make the demand go down, and in turn, costs for consumers.

[Beetle01]

This is not true. More corn will be grown (the government still pays for peeps not to grow corn), resulting in more supply. This will make the demand go down, and in turn, costs for consumers.

More corn will be grown? not enough to cover the price, 20% of this countries land is already used for corn farming.

Like I stated, corn is sold at or below cost, if you are selling a product at or below cost, you are making no money, and in some cases losing money on that sale.

Demand will not go down, about 70% of the products in your grocery store contain a corn based ingredient.

[ukyfootball]

Yes, demand will go down. As supply (corn) increases, the demand for it will decrease. It may be by just a little bit since corn is relatively inelastic, but the demand will go down.