To subsidize or not to subsidize: Dairy

springvalley · #41 12/27/12, 07:23 PM

Subsidies will never end, and this current farm bill will be extended, no one will ever pay 7-8 dollars a gallon for regular milk. > Thanks Marc

texican · #42 12/28/12, 10:59 PM

I'm all for an end to subsidies... and let a lot of farmers go under. When a few million (or billion) starve because of such policies, it'll be too late. Cut all subsidies, and eliminate food stamps... those strong enough to survive in a truly free market will be that much stronger.

CaliannG · #43 12/28/12, 11:31 PM

I can agree with you texican, about eliminating subsidies. But I have to disagree with you on eliminating food stamps. Food stamps feed children and dead babies make me sad.

Paquebot · #44 12/29/12, 02:06 AM

Inasmuch as per capita consumption in the US has been going down steadily for the past 35 years, figures would lead one to think that subsidies are just to buoy up a sinking skip. Worldwide we're 16th. 14 of the 15 countries ahead of us are European where the majority have no problem with lactose intolerance. Only 2 sub-Saharan countries make the top 99 and they are at 86 and 91. As the percentage of Americans of European descent becomes smaller, so does the use of milk.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ion_per_capita

Martin

mekasmom · #45 12/29/12, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

In all likelihood, Congress will put through new dairy subsidies, and this will be a moot point in a week. Still, I am interested in the discussion.

Milk is and has been used to feed infants, young children and babies all over the world since the beginning of the age. In my opinion, I want to see my tax dollars used to feed infants rather than to subsidize war.
I would keep the the subsidizes simply because I want my tax dollars to be used for good purposes. Money is just an object. People are much more important than money to me. It is a moral issue to me. Keep milk a inexpensive food to nourish the young. I don't care what it costs. I would rather pay for a gallon of milk for some little kid instead of paying for a bomb for a rich political fool to kill someone elsewhere in the world.

Paquebot · #46 12/29/12, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mekasmom

Milk is and has been used to feed infants, young children and babies all over the world since the beginning of the age.

You are quite correct. However, although all humans have been babies at one time in their lives, not one of their mothers were cows! And that's why there's Enfamil for those who can't have either.

Martin

ChristieAcres · #47 12/29/12, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FarmboyBill

I was forced by divorce to lose my first farm and move into town. I fought like crazy, for several years in order to be able to move back onto a farm. That cost me my second divorce. The fact that alla my wives were city girls cost me my 3rd divorce. NO Way was I going to lose my farm in/on the off chance I might save my marriage.
Its easy to give up and move into town. Its ram hard to move back out if one decides they dont like it in town.

Sorry to hear that, hope you've found a real nice country gal to settle down with this time around.

My first DH was a city guy, but current DH is a true homesteader and I'll keep him!

ChristieAcres · #48 12/29/12, 03:31 AM

Goats milk is much better for infants than cow's milk, also is easier to digest. I am hoping to get some goats next year.

I don't believe in subsidies; all should flat go.

Terrabus · #49 12/29/12, 04:50 AM

We live in an era of Big Government. I cannot imagine anybody in Washington allowing milk to go to $7 a gallon. As soon as it does, they won't talk about "free markets" or "fair prices". Instead, they will go to the nearest ghetto and show pictures of dirty children with unknown fathers drinking milk provided by some vague program.

Bettacreek · #50 12/29/12, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

You are quite correct. However, although all humans have been babies at one time in their lives, not one of their mothers were cows! And that's why there's Enfamil for those who can't have either.

Martin

Besides the soy based formulas, they're made from cows milk, lol.

I really feel that people aren't actually looking at the full picture before passing judgement. I mean really, let people starve? Let little dairies go under? Make everyone raise their own dairy animals? Be realistic, do some research and have a little bit of compassion. While you're tooting your own horn bout not helping anyone else, just remember, one day you may have tragedy and not be able to be completely self-sufficient. Then what? Will you still say "let them starve" when you're the one starving or will you start singing a different tune?

Paquebot · #51 12/29/12, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bettacreek

Besides the soy based formulas, they're made from cows milk, lol.

It's not a laughing matter to those babies who aren't comfortable with any mammal milk. That's why Enfamil is available in forms adapted to the needs of all babies.

Martin

Bettacreek · #52 12/29/12, 01:25 PM

And what does that have to do with the infants and youngins that need milk? We're not talking soy subsidies here, or was I mistaken on the thread content? I was merely laughing that some apparently don't realize where most formulas come from. You're swaying from the topic at hand.

Paquebot · #53 12/29/12, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bettacreek

And what does that have to do with the infants and youngins that need milk? We're not talking soy subsidies here, or was I mistaken on the thread content? I was merely laughing that some apparently don't realize where most formulas come from. You're swaying from the topic at hand.

You were the first to mention soy in this thread, I believe. I had merely pointed out that the demographics of this country are changing and that not all have to have milk to survive. Presently, those who can tolerate milk in their diet are the majority. Eventually, at the current population growth, they will be the minority. Milk use per capita has been going down since steady since 1975 and reflects that. When that point is reached, then the majority will have grounds to think of better things for the government to spend money on than milk. There are a number of members on HT who are lactose intolerant but I don't see any of them calling for an end to milk subsidies even though they could claim to have a legitimate reason. Now if someone mentions tobacco subsidies,......

Martin

Old Vet · #54 12/29/12, 02:41 PM

To end all supsities the federal government must lose all the regulations they have imposed.

rambler · #55 12/29/12, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

I can agree with you texican, about eliminating subsidies. But I have to disagree with you on eliminating food stamps. Food stamps feed children and dead babies make me sad.

Went to a farm auction back a decade or 2 ago, it was in the outer regions of the Twin Cities.

There were many 40 head dairy farms in the area, or at least there used to be.

What was replacing them was 160 acres of row houses, all looked the same, painted beige, house after house stamped out of the same blueprint, you'd need a house number to know one from the other.

The farm sale I was going to, the tarred road was under contsruction, going right through the farm yard. Dirt that used to be fields was bulldozed up in piles.

That was a very sad day for me. To see that.

Anyhow, bit of a double standard in your comment, I get it, but still, does it do any good to end the 20% of the Farm Bill that goes to farmers, and not end the 80% that goes to people not working?

We need to reduce it all, cut down all the subsidies.

In my town they just had a subsidy to look into how to make use of a 200 year old building left on main street, so they will spend $7,000 grant to look into how to spend more tax dollars on this unuseable building that is not generating taxes, but located in a high-tax area.

So this little shack of a building - yes it's good history, but - it is costing us in lost tax income, and $7,000 just to look into how to spend more tax dollars on it to preserve it but convert it into an art studio (most likely) that will have subsidised art shows in it for ever more.

We need to stop the madness, and yes that included the food stamp program, and the farm subsidies can be cut in half as well.

But all of them. So far, Faming has lost the ethanol subsidy, some ag offices have been closed to save costs, the Direct Payment is going to be elimitated (both sides agreed to that before they didn't pass the new bill). So, farming is already losing a lot of subsidies, and I'm ok with that.

Does farming need to lose everything, while the rest of the subsidy folks get bigger outlays?

--->Paul

CaliannG · #56 12/29/12, 07:10 PM

I'm sorry, Paul. Your post makes perfect sense, yes. Our population is too large, it isn't fair, etc.

But I am willing to subsidize individual people, most especially children (which is what most welfare programs go to) far more than I am willing to subsidize business, even small business.

I am going to have to stand by my position: Dead babies do, indeed, make me sad.

Paquebot · #57 12/30/12, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

I am going to have to stand by my position: Dead babies do, indeed, make me sad.

That should always be the case and I had a brother who only lived 10 days. I only remember him as crying for his entire short life.

But there is a point about this thread bothers me when it comes to using babies as an excuse for maintaining milk subsidies. Prior to 100 or so years ago, any baby born with lactose intolerance was not expected to survive. Therefore, here's a question to ponder. If parents knew that their baby was lactose intolerant, would they be guilty of manslaughter if the baby died from being forced to drink cow's milk?

Martin

Riverdale · #58 12/30/12, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMartianChick

America has grown accustomed to cheap food and expects it to always be that way. Get rid of the subsidies and everyone will readjust. Maybe then, farmers will get some respect!

Nope, they will become greedy hoarders who want to run the country.

I mean, farmers are the 3%.

Of course, the beneolent government ill step in and double the SNAP benefits to make up for the cost increase.

willow_girl · #59 12/30/12, 08:34 AM

A few random thoughts. Why does the government take an interest in milk production? Well, a country that can't feed itself is at the mercy of those who can. Then there is the matter of civil unrest. When people can't feed their children, they tend to become a little cranky, and milk is a popular ingredient in baby bottles. Thus it seems in the best interest of the government to be sure such essential food items are available and affordable, and that they're produced here on U.S. soil.

A dairy farm is a business like any other. The farmer/businessman decides whether the potential reward (profit) is worth the risk and labor. I have known quite a few farmers who decided to sell out, and a couple who were forced to sell out. It happens. Farmers cannot or will not continue operating indefinitely at a loss. If U.S. farms stop producing milk, we'll be forced to rely on imports from other countries. I'm sure New Zealand would be happy to help fill the gap ...

Dairy farmers are selling a highly perishable product. They can't sit back and hold out for a better price; the milk will spoil. Processors, like any other business, want to buy cheap and sell dear. Of course, there always is the risk of killing the goose that lays the golden egg -- if processors drive dairy farmers out of business by paying too little, their source of milk will dry up (or it will have to be trucked in from greater distances, driving up the cost). This also may result in boom-and-bust cycles which are detrimental to the industry as a whole. Who is going to risk their capital to go into dairy farming under those circumstances? Once again, fewer farms means less domestic production and heavier reliance on imported milk.

More random thoughts. Government price supports have their drawbacks. U.S. dairy farmers are very good at producing excess quantities of milk. With price supports in place (and absent a quota system like Canada's) the free market gets all out of whack. When supply exceeds demand, prices drop, but the dairy farmer's solution to lower prices is to add more cows and produce even more milk (since he is guaranteed a market for it). Very often, there is a banker holding a gun to his head as well. Of course, this results in even more excess milk. Currently, the government buys the excess. In 2009, for example, "the Agriculture Department ... committed to buying 111.6 million pounds of milk powder at 80 cents a pound, for roughly $91 million." Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/bu...anted=all&_r=0

Another problem with government subsidies is that they makes the industry less flexible and responsive to consumer demands. One argument I've read in Hoard's Dairymen is that the U.S. industry hasn't participated in product development and marketing initiatives to the extent it should because it isn't driven to do so by market forces. It's just as easy for players to sell the surplus to the government -- even at rock-bottom prices -- than it is to take the risk of developing new revenue streams.

It's a complicated issue, folks. Simply letting the free market set the price probably would result in fewer U.S. farms a lot of our milk coming from overseas. OTOH, I think if we're going to maintain price supports, we need to institute a quota system to eliminate overproduction.

CesumPec · #60 12/30/12, 11:26 AM

Willow girl - I agree milk is important, but so are lots of other things where the gov't doesn't regulate, stipulate, and obfuscate production and the market in 100 different ways. Broccoli gets to my table just fine. If you are just worried about dying babies like CG is, there is an aisle in just about every grocery store dedicated to diapers, formula, little jars of strained goo, and everything else a baby needs. Most of these items aren't regulated anywhere near the degree milk is. Yet the marketplace provides because there is a real need and people willing to pay for the product. That's capitalism.

You acknowledge that gov't has screwed up the industry but your solution is more gov't. The solution to a hurricane is not more wind and rain. We need LESS gov't.

If you are trying to have gov't save small dairy, you are just as bad as big Ag getting the gov't to protect GMOs, mega farm monoculture, and Agent Orange.