Replying to a message of Ed Hulett to Ross Sauer:

 JB>>>>> While I may not be wild about farm subsides, the farmers
 EH>>> actually JB>> produce something and are good for the
country. Shall
 EH>>> I contrast that JB>> with you ?

 RS>>>> That's just it.
 RS>>>> They get those subsidies even for *NOT* producing anything.
 RS>>>> The entire farm subsidy program is outmoded, it was created when
 EH>>> just RS> about all farms in the US were family farms.

 EH>>> It was FDR who started the farm subsidies and he made sure it would
 EH>>> profit his corporate cronies first.

 RS>> Which corporate cronies?

 EH> The big Agro-businesses.

Actually big agribusiness doesn't need subsidies.  Cargill is the biggest
privately owned
corporation in the country (and probably in the world) with an estimated
worth four times
bigger than the second  biggest (US$130 billion vs US$30billion).  I was
surprised to see
that Koch Induscties was as big as it is (it's in the top ten biggest
private companies - and
apparently they make, among other things, Northern bathroom tissue
).  The government
really hates those privately held companies, among other reasons because
since ethey're not
publicly traded they don't have to file reports with the SEC.

 RS>> During the 1930's, large corporate farms were owned by big business,
 RS>> and you just *KNOW* how pro-Roosevelt big business was at that time.
 RS>> (sarcasm off)

 EH> Your ignorance of history is astounding.

Yes it is.  Most big farms are not owned by the big agribusiness
corporations; many if
not most of them are owned by family corporations (incorporated in order to
preserve their
existence against the death tax).

 RS>> But as I said, the program is outmoded.

 EH> It was a payoff to big business all along.

Actually it was a payoff to farmers.  The problems the farmers have today
is mostly due
to monopsony.  For those unaware, a monopsony is a situation where there are many
producers and few customers; there are thousands of farmers, but very few
buyers of grain
and produce.  In this area, most grain is purchased by Scoular - which owns
most of the
smaller elevators in the area (it recently purchased a dozen or so in my
immediate area
when it bought the Hancock Elevator company a year or two ago).

Unfortunately for farmers, it's a buyer's market; and they can't hold grain
in on-farm
storage forever (about a year is all that's feasible).  Yes, there are
cooperatives and
yes they seem to be doing just fine - but they have to compete with the big
grain outfits
and therefore can't pay significantly more - if any more -for the grain
than the big boys
do).

This year's $5/bushel corn is an anomaly that can't and won't continue; I see that
a lot of farmers in the area are cutting back their plans for next year
(i.e. *not* leasing
ground to grow crops on).  Of no interest outside of those actually
involved is the fact that
many farms are owned by survivors or family of the original farmer, and
they can't work the
land so they lease it; just as a guess I'd say that probably 1/3 of the
acreage farmed in this
area is leased, the lease payment generally being a share of the crop at
harvest.  Next year's harvest will be interesting.

--- FleetStreet 1.19+