cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: neat trick

The bigger they are the more chance of more land being idled or being planted in a timely fashion.  If we are are going to become a government run farm or owned by the government who's gonna give that 110% it takes. I surely would not want to work if there was not much chance of gaining anything.  Guess let the government handle it thats what they want.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: neat trick

Totally agree, SW. 

 

That's why I've come to the opinion that there needs to be some risk in farming (no 100% guarantees), with risks scaling up as the risks to rural societies/businesses/etc increases.  The 85% crop insurance level is high enough, there are some negative consequences to "shallow-loss" programs.  There need to be reasonable and enforceable caps on all farm program benefits and subsidies, including crop insurance subsidies.