TB-Herefords":34crcnwa said:
What I see as a catch 22 is if our commodities shot up the rate of inflation would go through the roof. That would we as producers see the same income; just higher figures? All and all I really don't know a lot about farm subsidies. So enlighten me.
To clear the air, I take very little money from the government. Not because I can't but because I chose not to. I just want them to leave me alone and let me do my thing. Once you start taking money from them then you are merely a dog on a leash and there are strings attached. I prefer my freedom. That said, I don't fault anyoner for taking advantage of a program as long as they do not abuse the program.
Some call these programs welfare. I guess you could call it that but to me if a person is paying in more taxes than they are receiving from the government is this not more like a tax refund than welfare?
So what is welfare? Is it the guarantee of a decent price for your crop if the pencil pushing speculators rig the price and don't honor their contracts? Using Running Arrow Bill's argument about the value of forage, is welfare the cheap rent those in the west enjoy with their long term leases on gov't land? Could this not be bid out each year for other purposes at a higher price? I'm sure there are a lot of "green organizations" that would love to rent these properties for nature walks and such.
I don't know. But what I do see as a problem are those who abuse the system. Those people who insurance farm. They have know intention of actually making a crop. This is done outside the programs but is insured by the taxpayer. Whose at fault. I blame the government for not enforcing the rules cause if you know anything about farming then you know who the insurance farmers are. They give the real farmers a bad name hence this debate frequently comes up.
Of course here is the Catch 22. Whenever you allow the government to interfere under the guise of helping private business there will be abuse, fraud and waste. So, in my opinion, it would be nice to have a smaller government that only concerns itself with protecting our country like the constitution mandates. If this was done ACROSS THE BOARD to each and every agency AND the savings given back to the taxpayer through a reasonable and fair tax rate then I'd say get rid of all the programs. But, if they are going to take the money from the farming sector and reward those who chose not to work and are just a drain on society, I'd say leave well enough alone. However, it would be nice if the government actually enforced the laws in place regarding the abuse of these programs. My hats off to Obama because he understood the farm programs well enought to say the same.
But I would be careful on this subject because I seriously doubt the government will refund our savings to us the taxpayer. So the ten dollar question is - Would you rather reward someone who is creating jobs, and paying taxes get a tax refund OR would you rather see someone getting welfare? (BTW - I'm pretty sure Octo-Mom has received more government funds this year than any farmers in our area
)