- Agriculture.com Community
- Announcements & Forum Help
- Farm Business
- Young & Beginning Farmers
- Cattle Talk
- Crop Talk
- Hog Talk
- Machinery Talk
- Machinery Marketplace
- Shops, buildings and bins
- Ask the SF Engineman!
- Computers & more
- Precision Agriculture
- People & Rural Life
- Ag Forum
- Women In Ag
- Agriculture.com Blogs
- Your Farm in the Future
- Women in Ag: Lisa Foust Prater
- Women in Ag: Brenda Frketich
- Women in Ag: Anne Miller
- Women in Ag: Jennifer Dewey
- Women in Ag: Talkin' Turkey with Lara Durben
- Women in Ag: Heather Lifsey Barnes
03-02-2016 09:24 AM
Or, they might not give farmers welfare. The presumption that they always will come through runs deep, though.
Or as I've queried you in the past as to what sort of offset you thought you were getting, they could expand the corn incineration program. Or they might not. Might even wind it down, although I seriously doubt that.
Does stand as a reminder of unintended consequences when people get all stirred up and crazy.
03-02-2016 09:43 AM
The candidates' stance on ethanol would be nice to know. The markets want to know that too. The candidates' stance on TPP, WTO, GMO, strengthening CFTC for oversight on grain market involvement, and crop insurance, farm subsidies, etc. Are we going to tick off China to the point that they will import less U.S. ag products?
What am I missing? The markets want to know.
03-02-2016 09:55 AM - edited 03-02-2016 10:10 AM
The intent of this original thread is quite timely and appropriate. Would think that our farm publications and farm news source(s) would be obtaining, clarifying and publishing this information for us -- exactly what do the candidates represent regardiing agricultural issues, farm policy, especially the candidates which appear most likely to be nominated. Under current executive leadership, the administration seems intent on increasing controls and outreach thru the EPA, their budget plans keep attempting to screw down overall subsidies on the crop insurance programs, the RFS seems to be an annual fight, etc. I know that I am better off financially than 8 years ago, yet am 90% sure that would have happened if a Republican would have been in the White House also. Trump has proven that he can "shake up" the establishment, but not really clear what he actually stands for, and some of his protectionist remarks are troublesome for trade with some of our major trade partners, and some of the largest potential markets in the world. On the other hand, Hillary represents a continuance of the past 8 years, seems to be good at assigning blame while shedding accountability, and just not really sure what positives she has to offer. Then there is the huge benefit of some semblance of continuity in a relatively balanced supreme court. We are only a few bad decisions or bad policies away from igniting a potential agricultural meltdown. Not to mention the continuing threat of ISIS to stability in the Middle East, and the global unrest that has increased over the past 8 years.
03-02-2016 10:09 AM
......Prescott Bush was a big Hitler fan and trading partner, and Daddy Koch built the Reich's biggest refnery, where we lost countless planes and pilots trying to bomb.
The RAF finally took care of it, along with most the city.
Might serve as a cautionary tale on what can happen when too many Good People get themselves tirred up.
03-02-2016 10:24 AM
Last year the US had a $365 Billion trade deficit with China, just like every other year, that`s $1 Billion More every day of Walmart junk coming over here. And in exchange we have to beg China to buy our grain...but! if the grain is too high, they cancel the order That is industrial strength stupid doing business like that.
Carrier air conditioners went to Mexico where they pay workers $2/hr alot lower worker health and environmental regulations and then those air conditioners come right back here without a tariff or anything. Is it any wonder how this country has $19 Trillion debt, 94 million out of the workforce, foodstamps and 46% of the population doesn`t make enough to owe any federal income taxes? It wasn`t a matter of "if" finally people would get fed up and a "isolationist" would be the frontrunner, but "when". And by the way Mexico sends us $58 Billion More than we export to them. Sometimes you just have to walk away from these "deals".
03-02-2016 11:10 AM
The cautionary tale is what will happen to the USA once we no longer outspend the next 10 countries in the world combined on military preparedness......we have been on borrowed time ever since Harry Truman used the nuclear option on Japan and set the precedent.
Not condoning military madness...just recognizing that no amount of posturing and bowing around the world, as the zero did on his tours, is going to make foreign countries less likely to envy and covet what the USA has had. Viewing the world as a collective band of ISIS sympathizers out to get us is a whole lot more pragmatic approach than thinking all it takes is to join hands and sing Kum Bah Yah around a world campfire.
03-02-2016 11:44 AM
Good post roarin! Our farm leadership i.e National Farm Bureau or our marketing/checkoff program leaders should be looking a little harder at the candidates and their views on ag, yet it doesn't seem like they have a stance on any of them. For religious and business reasons I can't vote for an all-out liberal. I think Kasich probably has a better understanding of agriculture than any of the candidates being that he is the governor of Ohio. Trump probably has a better overall understanding of the U.S and world economies than any of the candidates, both republican and democrat. Trump has the potential to be the next Ronald Regan and inspire the country to be a leader once again, or he would be a huge failure. I don't think there would be an in-between with him. The thing that worries me about Trump is that he could isolate the U.S, and ag commodities would be the first thing to suffer.
03-02-2016 01:03 PM
Labor...we could be even worse off. Alot of
Equipment/parts made over the border now,
And look how high they are, with $2 labor.
Yes we need to hear about ag on the election
But we will not since none of them have a clue.
They are too busy with sound bites and
"Shock and awe" to the mass. We are less
Trump, apeals to blue collar, he makes off the cuff
Remarks, talks big, says how jobs leaving
.they think he understands and "gets it"... No all
A show...remember he wrote " the art of the deal"
Read it, gives you an insight how he thinks...some
Things give me the chills...the think he will be
The Commander and cheif...no military training, no foreign service....he is a "business man", successful.
How many times has he taken bankruptcy either
Himself or division
Hint: taking out bankruptcy is not considered good
Business, more mismanagement.
Oh...what about that fraud case, he got over
$35 million from 5000 people which the
State of new York has now filed charges
The sorry thing, he is one of the better ones
03-02-2016 01:55 PM
Elcheapo, if we flat out quit foreign trading, this country would be $700 Billion to the good. But I think we could negotiate much better trade deals where we wouldn`t always get taken to the cleaners. Just look at Foxconn factory in China where they make Iphones, it`s a heck of a mess and we have to beg these people to buy our grain???
03-02-2016 03:17 PM
BA. I'm not going to start a mud sling match here, we are both better than that. I disagree with the idea of stopping "all trade"....
care to think where ag commodity prices would go then ? granted, a large bulk of what we produce we use here, but the
traders in chicagoland would not understand.
I have to admit....this go round of people running has me speachless.......and that for el cheapo.......is rare.
i need some sprinkles..........i'm eating them stright now.......things getting bad anymore.
deere announced that farm income is going to be 50% lower....them and cat giving out more pink slips....equipment
sales figures are falling like a rock.
getting time to join hands and sing kum ba yah