$7 corn and $15 soybeans?

[Jogeephus]

Jogee...just call and tell the guvment you plan to flood the market with corn. Maybe they'll go back to paying you NOT to plant it.

Why would I want to produce any quantity when I can make more through insurance by failing. Just think of the money I'll save on diesel, herbicide, seed and time. Seems government views agriculture the same as banking. Penalize those who are productive and reward, dote and coddle the ticks and leaches of society. I think if you ask any federal crop insurance office why they paid someone to scatter seed on top of the dirt and never tend it they will all say that their job is to hand out checks and not police for fraud. Besides it makes them seem so in-expendable.

 

[larryshoat]

You all don't need to get your hopes to high. When folk can't pay the price for it the demand goes away, until it is affordable agin. What would you be willing to give for a lb of ground beef.

I totally agree with you. Then I see people paying $6 for a pack of smokes and it looks like they need a sandwhich. People think nothing of paying a buck and a half for a bottled water. Back in the 70's there were water fountains everywhere and at every gas station. Shucks, every bum on the street has a cell phone.

I don't think the consumer mindset is the same now as it was then.

I think you're right backhoe, the general economy is the wildcard in all this. I just don't have a clue how it all plays out.

Larry

 

[larryshoat]

Jogee...just call and tell the guvment you plan to flood the market with corn. Maybe they'll go back to paying you NOT to plant it.

Why would I want to produce any quantity when I can make more through insurance by failing. Just think of the money I'll save on diesel, herbicide, seed and time. Seems government views agriculture the same as banking. Penalize those who are productive and reward, dote and coddle the ticks and leaches of society. I think if you ask any federal crop insurance office why they paid someone to scatter seed on top of the dirt and never tend it they will all say that their job is to hand out checks and not police for fraud. Besides it makes them seem so in-expendable.

Crop insurance must be different there. We had a mix up in chemicals last year, killed 45 acres of soybeans. The first thing crop insurance did was come in and deny coverage on that 45 acres. The chemical dealer covered it, but crop insurance wouldn't have any part of it.

I know that in the beginning there were abuses. One big one was people with ground in 2 different counties would move grain around in order to show a loss in one of the 2 counties. As they find the crooks they change things ( usually making it harder and more paper work for the rest of us). They say less than 1% of producers attempt to cheat.

You raise an interesting point though. The crop insurance premium subsidy was created because paying disaster money to farmers became politically unpopular, so they said we'll subsidize crop insurance to get away from disaster payments. Well now folks are starting to figure out that a ton of money is being spent on crop insurance, and I think it will become unpopular as well.

Larry

 

[Stocker Steve]

With these high prices driving up the land rent for agriculture it would make someone raising cattle consider dumping the cattle and collecting land rent instead. Or I could just plow it all up and become an insurance farmer and retire next year.

If you have rough ground I think you need to consider shipping some big old cows (they are over $70/cwt here) and grazing some yearlings to fill the pasture. I see heavies going to kill right now. I won't do that but I have a few that will be early weaned this summer. :cboy:
If you have decent plow ground I think you need to consider doing some pasture renovation and buying revenue insurance to cover yourself. Been there, done that, but did not count on a drought.
Collecting rent would be way to easy. I look at every change in the market as an opportunity to justify doing more work. :dunce:

 

[Howdyjabo]

"I look at every change in the market as an opportunity to justify doing more work."

Been there done that- trying to change in my old age.

 

[novaman]

Why would I want to produce any quantity when I can make more through insurance by failing. Just think of the money I'll save on diesel, herbicide, seed and time. Seems government views agriculture the same as banking. Penalize those who are productive and reward, dote and coddle the ticks and leaches of society. I think if you ask any federal crop insurance office why they paid someone to scatter seed on top of the dirt and never tend it they will all say that their job is to hand out checks and not police for fraud. Besides it makes them seem so in-expendable.

Reminds me of last spring. Had a very wet spring which is unusual for this area. Sandier ground so getting into the fields is usually never a problem. Anyway a couple of big farmers (10,000+ acres) didn't make a big push to get their seed in the ground. They figured if conditions weren't perfect they would just hold off and if June 1 (that's the deadline for most crops to be seeded around here) came around they would shut the tractors off. And sure enough that's what happened. I think they got 40% of their crop in and the rest they collected insurance money TO NOT PLANT ANYTHING ON THAT GROUND. You've got to be kidding me. I am a young farmer/rancher looking for more ground to work with and these guys are getting paid to let fertile ground sit idle for a whole year. You want to talk about infuriating.

 

[bannedagain]

Why would I want to produce any quantity when I can make more through insurance by failing. Just think of the money I'll save on diesel, herbicide, seed and time. Seems government views agriculture the same as banking. Penalize those who are productive and reward, dote and coddle the ticks and leaches of society. I think if you ask any federal crop insurance office why they paid someone to scatter seed on top of the dirt and never tend it they will all say that their job is to hand out checks and not police for fraud. Besides it makes them seem so in-expendable.

Reminds me of last spring. Had a very wet spring which is unusual for this area. Sandier ground so getting into the fields is usually never a problem. Anyway a couple of big farmers (10,000+ acres) didn't make a big push to get their seed in the ground. They figured if conditions weren't perfect they would just hold off and if June 1 (that's the deadline for most crops to be seeded around here) came around they would shut the tractors off. And sure enough that's what happened. I think they got 40% of their crop in and the rest they collected insurance money TO NOT PLANT ANYTHING ON THAT GROUND. You've got to be kidding me. I am a young farmer/rancher looking for more ground to work with and these guys are getting paid to let fertile ground sit idle for a whole year. You want to talk about infuriating.

Preventive planting does not even pay the rent here. Same government program there as here. Only difference is the APH.

 

[bannedagain]

I know that in the beginning there were abuses. One big one was people with ground in 2 different counties would move grain around in order to show a loss in one of the 2 counties. As they find the crooks they change things ( usually making it harder and more paper work for the rest of us). They say less than 1% of producers attempt to cheat.


Larry

I farm in 3 different states but only have 1 producer number.

 

[highgrit]

I looked at the list of farmers that received Gov. subsidies in my counties, Dodge, Laurens, Telfair. And all the farmers in the top five that were receiving subsidies, mostly have all new equipment and vehicles. They are plenty rich, and cheating the Goverment in more ways than one. But its just called being a good business man around here.

 

[GMN]

I think the question is what will it do for farmers?

 

[Jogeephus]

I should say we have some really good farmers here but there are a handful that are abusing the system terribly. I'm all for helping the farmer with price supports and disaster to help when things tank but I am adamantly against the non-enforcement of the insurance and disaster. I have seen some terrible abuses and the farm insurance people don't seem to care. One lady at the ASCS office said if "they" had planted as many pumpkins as they claimed then we'd be the pumpkin capital of the nation. (heck, only a fool grows pumpkins here due to powdery mildew problems yet buckets of money was given to these few to bail them out)

To me, these few will blacken the eyes of the farming community as a whole but as said, when questioned about this, the crop insurance folks said it wasn't their job to police the program just to write checks. This to me is the wrong attitude to have as it will lead to damage to a noble profession as well as unneccessary paperwork on the producers end. I think the solution is quite simple. Like Bannedagain stated, a single producer number should be used for each farmer no matter how many names they go under and the total yields should be examined instead of specific yields. All this information is already in place so we wouldn't need another agency to police it.

 

[backhoeboogie]

I posted my sentiments on this about an hour back. Poof it was gone! :cboy:

 

[john250]

Some folks I heard about abused the insurance on tobacco something fierce. Funny thing. If you bought all the inputs you needed and hired all the labor-- the insurance would barely break you even. But if you didn't buy any inputs beside plants you could make a nice profit.

Heard about another guy who proved his yields with consecutively numbered scale tickets from a local (small) elevator.

Every real insurance company has a fraud department. The new farm bill needs to address this if the companies writing the insurance won't do it themselves.

This would be a major scandal and probably would hurt ALL farmers if someone like the NYTimes wanted to emphasize the story.

I'm not into turning in my neighbors, especially when the check writers don't care and won't take any action against offenders. But I'd like someone else (an investigator) to ask them for fertilizer receipts and such other evidence as would be appropriate to prove they tried to raise something. I'd expect the same if I ever had a claim.

 

[bannedagain]

I'm not into turning in my neighbors, especially when the check writers don't care and won't take any action against offenders. But I'd like someone else (an investigator) to ask them for fertilizer receipts and such other evidence as would be appropriate to prove they tried to raise something. I'd expect the same if I ever had a claim.

I would think the failed crop would be evidence enough that they tried to grow something would it not? Most of my acres would never show fertilizer receipts. Unless of course a photocopy of the animals ass the manure came from would please the adjuster.

 

[larryshoat]

I know that in the beginning there were abuses. One big one was people with ground in 2 different counties would move grain around in order to show a loss in one of the 2 counties. As they find the crooks they change things ( usually making it harder and more paper work for the rest of us). They say less than 1% of producers attempt to cheat.


Larry

I farm in 3 different states but only have 1 producer number.

You may have one producer#, but unless your in an enterprise unit, you have multiple units. What these guys were doing was putting production from one unit on to another unit thus showing a loss on one unit where there should not be a loss on either unit. This worked on LDP as well.

Larry

 

[bannedagain]

Raising one APH by lowering another APH still equals the same end result. It is the law of averages. I submit 1 production number for corn one for beans. I insure 80% of that APH. Maybe there is a way to getting something for nothing. I don't know how too.

 

[highgrit]

To me public health insurance is way more important than crop insurance. The goverment should not subsidize any private business. I you can't make it you starve or change what you do.

 

[larryshoat]

I wouldn't care if they took away crop insurance and government payments. I'm a farmer not a paperwork guru and with those two things there's paperwork. The only difference is that cash rents would be lower. The truth is crop insurance and payments are here and as long as everybody else uses it I'll have to too. The government will never get out of agriculture because they want control .

Larry

 

[shorty]

Why is it when grain prices go way up , fertilizer prices go up too , it seems like they take advantage of farmers when they have more money to spend.

 

[larryshoat]

Why is it when grain prices go way up , fertilizer prices go up too , it seems like they take advantage of farmers when they have more money to spend.

Odd coincidence huh? There's always an anhydrous plant that blows up or something with a potash mine. Wouldn't it be different if they came out and said " you guys are getting more for a bushel of corn and we intend to get a chunk of it", same with land rent, same with the price of seed and chemicals. By the time everybody jumps on getting "their fair share" you're lucky to make as much as you did before it went up, then you can go back to the bank and tell them you need your credit line upped to cover the massive increase in inputs. I reckon since I'm the only one on Al Gore's internet that borrows money and doesn't pay cash for everything, I guess it doesn't matter .

Larry