The rural economic crisis in Wisconsin is real. On top of everything else, we’ve got to defeat Trump in order to save the family farm.— Ben Wikler (@benwikler) September 6, 2019
__
Farm Loan Delinquencies Surge in U.S. Election Battleground Wisconsin | Investing News | US News https://t.co/OuGrGCshhs
I've never understood why it's important to save the family farm, but I'll put that aside. Let's just look at what defeating Trump has to do with saving the family farm. According to the linked article, it's simply that Trump's dealings with China have affected farmers. So is the idea that Democrats would give China what it wants and that's a good idea because — farmers?
Now, it is easy to see that Democrats want to win Wisconsin and Wisconsin's got some farmers and they're in the parts of the state that went big for Trump in 2016. It's strategically valuable to Democrats to get the farm-country voters to feel that Trump has wronged them.
Dave Daniels, a corn and dairy farmer in Kenosha County, Wisconsin, voted for Trump in 2016 and still supports the president.... "The trade deals are in the back of everyone's mind right now," said Daniels, 64. "The thing everyone is saying is, 'we have to make some money this year.'"As ever, there is long-term and short-term thinking. When it comes to trade with China, what do the Democrats have to offer — to family farmers, to the agriculture industry, and to all of us? Short term, we feel stressed out not to have trade peace, and I suspect the Democrats will only exacerbate that strife for their own power ambitions.
Posts
125 comments:
You can sell the family farm and make a lot of money.
What is, and has been killing the family farm are these huge dairy operations that milk 1, 2, 3,000 cows 3 times a day. Employing illegal immigrants to do the work.
"I've never understood why it's important to save the family farm...."
It's the family business. If family farms fail, leaving farming to big agribusiness, it would be equivalent to megacorporations driving all small, individually-owned businesses out of business. This kills competition and forces independent business owners/employers to become employees of some other large entity.
The loss of family farms would also, I presume, lead the family farmers to lose their properties.
The democrats want to collectivize the family farm. They also want only organic farms without heavy machinery, but they certainly don't want to get up early and work hard all day.
Large production farms are often owned by families. These farms have enough money to use methods that are less impactful to the land than farmers who can't afford modern methods.
Collusion with the Chinese.
Pit the farmers against the factory workers.
Nebraska is farm and ranch country. Trump will win Nebraska by 40 points.
Interesting perspective on "family farms" here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2017/march/large-family-farms-continue-to-dominate-us-agricultural-production/
Trump has billions of dollars in tariff money sitting in the bank. There is already a bailout to help American farmers through the trade dispute.
Add one and one and what do you get? A big additional cash bailout for US farmers in an election year.
Check and mate.
So Ben tweets this out the day after Kamala calls for government bans on eating meat...
I will say that right across the border in Quebec, through punishing tariffs, BTW, they have managed to keep small farms viable, and it makes for a very different countryside than in the US, where farms are more consolidated. You have a many more people living in the countryside. It’s kind of nice. But I am not sure it’s worth lowering food production and raising the cost of food for poor people.
@Robert Cook
What I don't understand is why we as a group should care about whether businesses in particular sectors of the economy are small or large. There's this fetish about small businesses (and on top of that a romanticism about the family business), but I don't see why the government is involved in preserving smallness. I understand the government role in preserving a competitive market and dealing with monopolies, but if there are efficiencies of scale that create a trend toward larger businesses, why should govt interfere with the market?
I do understand worries about fluctuating prices and the connection to the negotiations with China, but what's the plan to deal with that? I don't like the "family farm" buzzword.
The family farmer thing is mostly nonsense.
In my home county of Illinois, several successful families gradually bought out all the small farmers over decades.
The reason is economy of scale. Corn and soybeans are the dominant crops. In my grandfather's day, a farm might be 500 acres. Today, it is more likely to be 10,000 acres. Farmers buy huge equipment, like tractors that are as big or bigger than a semi-truck with a trailer and it takes a lot of space to maneuver that equipment. Farmers buy combines that cost $1 million.
So, even the "family" farms become huge operations run by the few who were educated (at ag school at the University of Illinois) and capable of managing farming on a huge scale.
The successful families have a succession problem. Most of the kids don't want to be farmers. They head off to the big cities for clerical jobs. So, over time, the huge family farms were sold off to corporate owners who hire tenants to do the work.
The small family farm thing is a romantic appeal to an era that has been over for at last 75 years.
The "family farm" is not to be joked about. It is deep in the nation's psyche however outdated the idea may be. It is why our great-great grandparents did everything but swim the Atlantic to get here and homestead their very own patch of land to farm.
"So is the idea that Democrats would give China what it wants and that's a good idea because — farmers?"
Imagine if it was giving Russia what it wants for the sake of the farmers. Would they still sing the same tune?
A FB commenter recently bewailed "factory farming" as the cause of all our problems. That factory farming is what I described in my previous post.
Factory farming has been phenomenally successful in producing an almost miraculous surplus of food.
Check it out next time you go to the supermarket.
My dad grew up on a small farm. It was just another form of poverty, sent out as a teenager with a shotgun to try to rustle up some dinner, or at last a rabbit for some soup, but at least crime wasn’t a problem.
The real problem is "How do you keep them down on the farm once they've seen Paree?"
Farming is miserably hard, dangerous work.
You might want to romanticize it, but almost everybody who does that work wants to get the hell out of it.
Of course Democrats want to "save the family farm". Just like Robert Mugabe did.
Crime wasn’t a problem because they had nothing to steal. Maybe a hobo might steal a couple of eggs or a chicken.
Getting rid of the estate tax would go a long way to saving the family farm. What's the Democrats position on that?
The only real, viable "family" farms of the type Cook romanticizes are boutique operations that sell specialty vegetables to posh restaurants and outrageously expensive hipster stores in the big cities.
We have quite a few of these in the Hudson Valley.
Ironically, one of the reasons is that the Hudson Valley doesn't have the huge farming tracts common in Illinois, so farming in the Valley cannot possibly compete financially in the production of corn, wheat and soybeans.
Hipsters buy up the small plots available in the Valley to produce their boutique crops. It's still a damned hard life.
I grew up on a farm and we were poor. As an adult I got a job after getting out of the Air Force and was no longer poor. I've talked to lots of people over the years about working on the farm and having a factory job and they all realized how much better their lives were when they got a job. However, I have good memories of growing up in the fifties on a farm in a rural area but that era is gone.
current farm problems have as much to do with a wet spring and loss of crop as anything trade related. Couldn't get a tractor into my field until mid July. (I lease to an actual farmer).
Plus estate tax is ruinous for family farms (or small businesses).
Average hourly earnings up nearly 4% for the year. Job growth still up. Unemployment rate 3.7%.
Democrats want to save the family farm by getting rid of meat, biofuels, your tractor. Also you have to be all organic, so they're coming for your yield, too...
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
There's this fetish about small businesses (and on top of that a romanticism about the family business), but I don't see why the government is involved in preserving smallness. I understand the government role in preserving a competitive market and dealing with monopolies, but if there are efficiencies of scale that create a trend toward larger businesses, why should govt interfere with the market?
Gosh. If I knew nothing else about our hostess, this statement alone would demonstrate that she is not a small business owner. I, on the other hand, AM a small business owner. My point of view is that I while I do not wish to be "preserved" by the government, I also do not wish to be shit on with regulation. In addition, I do not like to see bigger businesses manipulate the government for their advantage, i.e. GE and the fucking modern light bulbs. Spend ten years running a small business and you will be hostile to most forms of government, unless the cash in your business flows from a government.
And don't tell me that running a weblog with an Amazon portal IS a small business. It is an admirable avocation, but much closer to "mailbox money".
"why should govt interfere with the market?"
They think they're smart and can run it better. In reality, the opposite is true.
The only real, viable "family" farms of the type Cook romanticizes are boutique operations that sell specialty vegetables to posh restaurants and outrageously expensive hipster stores in the big cities.
That's a trend in the Northeast, too. More power to 'em if they can garner a premium for squash blossoms and artisan grass-fed beef. But ST highlights an interesting point on inequality. Which party is more likely to attack WI farms for failing to feed the masses and catering to the rich?
It's the family business. If family farms fail, leaving farming to big agribusiness, it would be equivalent to megacorporations driving all small, individually-owned businesses out of business. This kills competition and forces independent business owners/employers to become employees of some other large entity.
Cookie,
I never pegged you for a free marketeer.
it would be equivalent to megacorporations driving all small, individually-owned businesses out of business. This kills competition and forces independent business owners/employers to become employees of some other large entity.
You mean like WalMart that just did another virtue signal to the left ?
The family farm doesn’t get me the grapes, raspberries an bananas I want year round.
This year I've noticed a lot of crops in nearby fields where I would normally see soybeans or corn not far from where I live here in Ky and it took a while for me to figure out what they were. Hemp, I went online and looked at a picture of young hemp plants and it matched those I'd seen. McConnell and Paul and have been pushing hemp and helped make it legal to grow. Interesting that one grower of hemp has reported thief of some of his plants and planned to install cameras.
Spend ten years running a small business and you will be hostile to most forms of government, unless the cash in your business flows from a government.
The most conservative voters today are small business owners. Doctors used to be small business owners but Obamacare has turned most of them into employees and the politics will shift accordingly.
Nostalgically we yearn for:
-produce from the local farm
- health care from the solo Family doc downtown
- advice on the right gasket from our local hardware store
- the latest news from our local paper
- a good cut of meat from the butcher
But on the other hand we do like
- our 70 inch TV
- fresh fruit year round
- Amazon next day delivery
- commenting on blogs or on twitter
Farmers need to adopt new technology. Get out of raising cattle and develop a family server farm. Learn to code. I am sure the govt will come up with a program to replace the food that was lost due to this conversion. Or at least assist in rationing what is left.
“The successful families have a succession problem. Most of the kids don't want to be farmers. They head off to the big cities for clerical jobs. So, over time, the huge family farms were sold off to corporate owners who hire tenants to do the work.”
See that a lot. My kid’s SO grew up on a dairy farm. The 4th, a boy, is taking it over. The only one who had any interest in being shackled to the farm probably 360 days a year. Right now, his father steps in, when he and his new wife get away over night. But his mother, in particular, is reveling in the freedom of being able to get away, finally with her husband, for the first time in 40 years for the type of nice week or two long vacations that the rest of the country gets to take.
See it around here too. Know one family with 5 boys. Only one stayed. Ambitious people have been leaving rural America for a long time now. My grandfather left MI (near Frankfurt) a bit over a century ago, got a college degree, moved to Chicago for a career, then returned to MI and built a house next to his mother’s for retirement. Woman two doors down here left probably 45 years ago, and returned for retirement. Met her brother last week who stayed and has an excavation company here. My other grandfather left the farm in the OK panhandle, got a college degree, and settled in Denver almost a century ago, with my grandmother who had a similar story(they met at the OK teachers’ college right after WW I). Another brother left soon after that. Two stayed, at least up to the Dust Bowl - which is why I have relatives in CA and SE TX.
There is something really romantic about farming. It was the farmers who settled this country, coast to coast, pushing out the French and Spanish, and pushing the Indians onto reservations. So, I would expect that most of us with roots here going back into the 19th century or earlier here have farmers in our ancestry. And, of course, many of our 19th Century and earlier immigrants came here to farm. But is hard work, often with long hours. I am very happy that I could spend my career earning good money sitting in an air conditioned office.
As to AA's question, no, the Democrats are not going to save the family farm.
"If you like your family farm, you can keep it," but it is a false promise. The Democrat Party organization is based on the New York big city model as it has been since Van Buren first organized the national party.
The South is another matter, but the Solid South always were dominated by the large plantation owners, i.e, industrial farming of a sorts.
Yeoman farmers are not in the Democrat Party's DNA.
I'm glad to see that hemp is being grown again. Oh how much I miss burlap bags. Who doesn't like a burlap bag? I used to buy farm machinery parts for my Minnesota hay mower from Stillwater prison in Stillwater MN. The parts were put into burlap bags. How cool is that? No nasty plastic killing all of the whales and creatures from the forest floor. No sir.
Get out of Madison and drive to the drftless area of Wisconsin to understand how important the small farm is to the economy and culture of the area, and the maybe understand why selling agriculture products to China is not giving in to China.
Ann Althouse said...
What I don't understand is why we as a group should care about whether businesses in particular sectors of the economy are small or large. There's this fetish about small businesses (and on top of that a romanticism about the family business), but I don't see why the government is involved in preserving smallness. I understand the government role in preserving a competitive market and dealing with monopolies, but if there are efficiencies of scale that create a trend toward larger businesses, why should govt interfere with the market?
9/6/19, 7:13 AM
Thanks for your question! In point of fact, government usually doesn't "preserve" smallness. That's campaign rhetoric. Most governments punish smallness and preserve largeness through regulation, which forces smaller firms out of the market and leaves larger firms in. Larger firms are much more capable of hiring teams to comply with the legal requirements, that is when they're not actually writing the legislation. By coincidence, the giant firms are the ones most likely to employ illegal immigrants, whereas small businesses know they will face prison if they try. So if President Trump wants to preserve the family farm? Crack down on illegals, deregulate agriculture, and punish the megacorps. Everybody who counts wins.
"... maybe understand why selling agriculture products to China is not giving in to China...."
That's really missing the point.
"By coincidence, the giant firms are the ones most likely to employ illegal immigrants, whereas small businesses know they will face prison if they try."
Do we know that? Small businesses don't employ those here illegally but big ones do? I haven't researched that but I don't assume it's true.
If a business is so small that it's actually only the family, that's different. But don't "family farms" hire farm workers?
I suspect the Democrats will only exacerbate that strife for their own power ambitions.
Why stop now? It's been working for them for 190 years....
"Get out of Madison and drive to the drftless area of Wisconsin to understand how important the small farm is to the economy and culture of the area,”
Yes, get away from the urban areas that have been pounded by Chinese currency manipulation, steel dumping, etc. Democrats are working with China, and China has made it a priority to get a new negotiating partner by defeating Trump.
Who says Democrats are unpatriotic! The most patriotic thing we can do is help the Chinese get rid of Trump!
"I've never understood why it's important to save the family farm"
There was a time when it was considered important to save the family grocery store against the emergent chain stores. Now the corner family grocery stores are mostly gone, and no one much misses them. Instead, these stores are now said to create "food deserts" because they sell the convenience and junk foods their customers actually buy, instead of stocking fresh fruits and vegetables that will rot before they sell.
So, "The Family Farm" comes with a package of bucolic, pleasing images. Nonetheless, if it is to be "saved" some explanation as to how and why seems warranted.
As soon as D's win, their bogus utopian promises wither. and then, weirdly, shit gets worse.
Lots of interesting takes on farming. Finally! Something in my Wheel House.
Factory farming. Much like 'assault gun' you have to define that term if it is a position you will debate from. I 'assume' what almost everyone means, is vertical integration. Whats that?
It finally became clear to me when I worked an area that grew turkeys. Pretend a long lost cousin willed you his turkey sheds. All you have to do is buy the chicks and feed them to slaughter weight. Average maybe 12 hours a week work. Mostly daily walk throughs checking that waterers and feeders are working, and tossing out dead turkeys.
You dont just order 4000 chicks from Amazon. You have to "contract" a kill slot at the processor to have a place to ship the fat birds when you're done feeding them. The processor, and the chick seller, are the same entity, or work close together. You the farmer, is the hired help in the middle. While you own the sheds, the equipment to feed, water, and handle manure, you probably don't own the turkeys. You buy the feed (formula dictated by the processor), hire the trucks both ways.
So, is that 'factory farming' or vertical integration? And is that good or bad? Poultry is where it has been in place for decades, hogs are working towards that, and beef is playing catch up.
Next lesson, "What it take to earn a living farming"
A bit off topic,
I read an article the other day about a blueberry farmer in Maine(?) and how he was suffering because of the tariffs. He could not sell blueberries to China and didn't know what he was going to do.
Then at the very end of the article, they had another blueberry farmer, perhaps in Michigan telling how good the Chinese tariffs were for him. Apparently his big competition was Canadian blueberry growers. The Chinese have not decreased their consumption of blueberries, they just buy them from Canada now. Canada used to dump low price blueberries into the US but no longer are. At least not as much. This has improved this guy's sales.
We are also hearing how horribly soybean farmers are doing. If you look at production numbers, https://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Field_Crops/soyprod.php they are down sharply vs last 3 years. Perhaps 20% and down a bit less sharply over the 2 years before that. But production is up over all prior years.
Corn production is down slightly over previous 3 years but still up compared to all years prior to those.
Seems like just a few months ago we were hearing about what a horrible year it would be due to wet weather or something to do with climate change. Farmers could not plant their fields and the world would end.
So how much of this decline in soybeans and corn production is weather and how much is tariffs? And does it really matter since either way it is that monster Trump's fault.
John Henry
ot: Democrats want to give radial Islamic men good paying jobs.
Like this guy:
An American Airlines mechanic is accused of sabotaging a flight over stalled union contract negotiations.
According to a criminal complaint affidavit filed in federal court, Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani admitted during an interview Thursday that he tampered with a navigation system on the plane so that he could collect overtime work.
But I'm a radical racist for noticing.
I would expect that most of us with roots here going back into the 19th century or earlier here have farmers in our ancestry.
Our family farm was sold after my grandmother died. We used to go down to it when I was a kid. That area was once mostly owned by my great grandfather's sons. He had 9 boys, all of whom lived into adulthood. Farms were far safer in those days than cities. One time visiting, I met an old lady who remembered him. His house was a big white house in town that he built when he retired to town. I still drive down to that town when I am visiting. It is Odell, IL and has a population of around 600. It had a fine high school with several National Merit Scholars until the county forced them to close it and send all the kids to a Unified High School 20 miles away.
The Catholic church there is St Paul's and the stained glass window on each side as you enter was donated by my great grandparents. One the left are the names of Mr and Mrs Michael Kennedy. On the right, Mr and Mrs John Ferguson.
Two of his brothers died in the Union Army, one of a wound at Vicksburg and the other of measles in camp. The family farm was actually my grandmother's. Her parents had homesteaded it and one field, used as a pasture, had never been plowed. It was primeval prairie. My grandfather had it plowed one year and planted in corn. That summer, the corn was ten feet high.
The point about "family farms" is ancient.
This is the issue the Gracchi pursued against the senatorial powers in ancient Rome.
They sought to preserve that yeomanry that was the foundation of Rome.
The US founders, many of them, saw such parallels with that vision of Rome, a republic with its roots in a free yeomanry. Rome fell, ultimately, in that view, because that which had made it great had been broken and perverted, the free farmers driven out by slave-operated latifundia, and the dispossessed yeomen converted into the Roman mob, and the Roman military that had been a militia of the people turned into professionals serving warlords.
There is still a deep cultural connection with that ideal, no matter the changed circumstances.
Someone mentioned agribusiness or perhaps big agribusiness, driving family farmers out.
Who owns these evil "agribusinesses"? Aren't most of them owned by families? Gallo, for example, owns 20,000 acres of vinyards and is a family business.
So is Cargill, 90% owned by the McLennan and Cargill families. Would be #15 on the Fortune 500 if public. The CEO is married to a McLennan.
Are these big agribusiness or "family farms"?
One problem with family farms is that many are run as family farms rather than as agricultural businesses. This has nothing to do with size.
Some will survive just fine. Others will go belly up. That is the way it should be.
John Henry
Or, you have a family farm (a CENTURY farm), like my mom's.
Her Grandfather (shes 87) bought the farm from his father (my great great grandfather).
It's been in our family, since about 1870. We've NEVER farmed it; Always rented it out.
That's right; my mother IS a family farmer (AND owns a Century farm!). Farming for her consists of receiving checks from Hertz Farm Management. Seriously, What ELSE are you going to do with 185 acres?
i see that i wrote that confusingly ;
my mom's 87, her grandfather died a hundred years ago.
"The Small Family Farm"
I assume, again, the definition is, that farm that raised crops from the land and added value to that bushel of corn, by running it through that wealth creator, steer or hog (meat), cow (milk) or chicken(eggs, meat) This is labor intensive as the grain has to be harvested, stored, then processed, and fed to the livestock.
Substitute pasture, for corn, and you get somewhat the same dynamic, with labor being used to maintain the pasture and fencing and checking at least daily that paycheck wandering about out on the range. Losing even on animal, can have a very real impact on your future life style.
This farming model included the farm wife. Part hired hand, part para-veterinarian, part domestic engineer, part gardener, part mother, part accountant, and part high end escort.
Also needed was slave labor. Provided by the brood mother, four to six slaves per generation.
The problem with big business is that it's still run by people. Nothing about success in big business assures any extra wisdom or compassion. Kind of like a toddler with a gun. Big business is powerful and dangerous, but the wisdom and humanity available to manage that power is no greater. Economies of scale lead to insect politics. We are not insects, and I don't think we want to be. What's wrong with big is the same as what's good about big. It's more powerful, period. Imagine if everything in your life just kept growing bigger. It might have some sweet spots, but eventually it doesn't fit comfortably in your life.
another iowan said...
Also needed was slave labor. Provided by the brood mother, four to six slaves per generation.
My college roommate Roger (whose family farms HUGE swaths of Floyd county used to say:
They will NEVER get rid of the 'family farm' It's the way to get around Labor laws
There's a lot more than China and tariffs disrupting the 'family farm'. Pulled this out of a BBC article titled, "The future of food: Why farming is moving indoors":
A car park opposite the infamous New York City housing estate where rapper Jay-Z grew up seems an unlikely place for an agricultural revolution.
Ten shipping containers dominate a corner of the Brooklyn parking area, each full of climate control tech, growing herbs that are distributed to local stores on bicycles. This is urban farming at its most literal.
The containers are owned by Square Roots, part of America's fast-expanding vertical farming industry, a sector run by many tech entrepreneurs who believe food production is ripe for disruption.
The world's best basil reputedly comes from Genoa, Italy. Square Roots grows Genovese seeds in a container that recreates the city's daylight hours, humidity, Co2 levels - and all fed hydroponically in nutrient-rich water.
"Rather than ship food across the world, we ship the climate data and feed it into our operating system," says co-founder Tobias Peggs.
The real problem is "How do you keep them down on the farm once they've seen Paree?"
Or, as Johnny Carson once put it, how ya' gonna keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen the farm. Heh.
The world's best basil reputedly comes from Genoa, Italy. Square Roots grows Genovese seeds in a container that recreates the city's daylight hours, humidity, Co2 levels - and all fed hydroponically in nutrient-rich water.
My guess, soil, is at least as important as climate to the final product. Hydroponics is over the top on energy consumption.
Trump is playing a long term game on trade with China. China knows that historically US politicians have lacked the patience and fortitude to engage in a long term trade strategy (where long term is anything more than one month). Trump understands that China thinks he will fold and he is calling their bluff. At this point in time Trump is in a much better position than Xi Jinping to endure long term tactics.
Trump is negotiating brilliantly and is using his strengths. His political opponents in the US are engaged in political sabotage.
Back to the family farm. Is size the metric you are going to use as the metric, to determine if a farm is factory, or family?
At the micro level, income is determined by yield per acre. Wether that is bushels, or heads, or pounds, it comes down to yield per acre.
Today corn production is netting about $50 per acre, and soybeans is lossing $60 per acre. Let's pretend that you average $75 per acre on all crops. 1000 acres=$75,000 annual income. That's net after all expenses. (central Iowa) So if you are a family farmer, and you farm (own and rent) 1000 acres, you can support One family. Kid comes back home from college? Now we need to find another 1000 acres. Is this above the "family farm" threshold, and now moves it into corporate farm, or factory farm? What about the 2cnd and 3rd kid coming back home? Grandkids?
Tommy Duncan, doing yoemans work trying to cover up sharpie-gate!
I'd love to see some actual facts. Numbers - in context. But of course, we never get them. Which farmers are being hurt by China? Who are they and how many? How much did they sell before, how much do they sell now? Is it reduced volume or just a reduced price because of reduced China demand?
And what would prevent China from reducing US Farm Imports anytime they want for any reason? If they feel it to their advantage? Now they doing it because of Trump, but it seems to be a weapon they can use anytime for any reason.
But we never get reasoned analysis. Just hot air.
Following up on the "family Farm" discussion.
3 generations ago. My great great grandfather gave each of his 3 boys and one girl 160 acres. That was at the end of the 1800's. My grandfather got one of those quarter sections. Added to it, and left it to my father and his sister. Dad bought out his sister, and left it to one of his sons, now being farmed by his son and daughter.
Today there is no way to generate enough profit to amass that kind of land holdings to start all of your kids in farming.
There's this fetish about small businesses
Do you know anyone who has a small business? Do you ever talk to them about their issues?
Small business is and has bern the backbone of this country.
You should look at the tax code. You might be surprised what’s considered revenue-wise a small business. And how much is paid in taxes.
Japan is buying our corn, so they’re not hurt.
The Farm bill covers losses for the most part.
Did anyone read the BBC article about the tariffs the Brits put on our specialty cheeses?
They’re so high the Brits don’t know we make specialty cheeses. They think we make wrapper and pizza cheese.
If The Donald can get our cheeses in their stores, Wisconsin would have very happy farmers.
But we have to remember the FDA or the USDA under Obama tried to kill that market.
Here's the 5 year chart you're looking for. if you hover over the line you get the specific price for a days close.
May of 2018 is when things fell out of bed (this time)but even after that, Nov soy traded about the same level as nov 2015. Markets are cyclical, who knew.
"But we have to remember the FDA or the USDA under Obama tried to kill that market."
Nah, they were protecting us from runny Camembert.
For that chart I linked, you have to go the header and select the 5 year option
And what would prevent China from reducing US Farm Imports anytime they want for any reason? If they feel it to their advantage?
Yes. Often people in the know,(not media types) speak of non-tariff barriers, and China was brutal in applying non-tariff barriers. Big breaks would happen in the futures trade, and it was not uncommon to learn the China have refused delivery of 2-4 cargos(ships) of US soybeans due to reasons.
While soybeans are a true commodity. US has huge advantages because we can deliver a consistent, quality, clean, product, on short notice. Need two cargos leaving on a ship in 30 days? Only the US can do that. Remember, stuff at ports, or intransit to ports, have already changed ownership to the end buyer. To get soybeans from the source of production, to a port in 30 days can only happen in America
Trump understands that China thinks he will fold and he is calling their bluff. At this point in time Trump is in a much better position than Xi Jinping to endure long term tactics.
The Democrats are doing their best to sabotage this. Just as Obama hid the Iran terror plot in DC. The trouble is that the Democrats are looking crazier every month. Now they plan another marathon "Townhall" on LGBTQ in October. That should help with China.
The Chinese have to be looking at this with dismay. "How did we ally ourselves with these crazies ?"
"current farm problems have as much to do with a wet spring and loss of crop as anything trade related. Couldn't get a tractor into my field until mid July. (I lease to an actual farmer)."
This. Especially in Ohio.
Democratic tax policies, as mentioned above, are not friendly to family farms in the least.
"current farm problems have as much to do with a wet spring and loss of crop as anything trade related. Couldn't get a tractor into my field until mid July. (I lease to an actual farmer)."
This. Especially in Ohio.
Current farm problems are based on price, not yield. If, a wet, late spring was a problem, the markets would be higher, not at, or, below the cost of production. It is way to easy to conflate what is happening in your small geography, to what the County, Region, State, Nation, and Global production is actually doing.
This year where I live, it was wet and somewhat late. 18 to 25 miles to the south, Soybean spraying was finishing up before all the beans were planted here, and north 30 miles, is was wetter and later than where I lived. Overall, Iowa yields will be close to the 15 year average. I have to back a ways, because yields have been going up consistently for at least the last 10 years.
"Democratic tax policies, as mentioned above, are not friendly to family farms in the least."
And unlike the generally clueless at-large voter pool, I bet the farmers know this.
I've known a lot of family farmers, and they all have one thing in common, they bitch about everything.
another iowan said...
My grandfather got one of those quarter sections. Added to it, and left it to my father and his sister. Dad bought out his sister, and left it to one of his sons, now being farmed by his son and daughter.
This is why, on my dad's side; we don't have any farms. but, it would go like this
Greatgrandpa had a farm; he died, the daughter wanted HER share; so did the government: so it was sold
(other ggp had a farm; he died, the daughter wanted HER share; so did the government; so it was sold
Between siblings wanting Their share (but not wanting to farm), and the government DEMANDING Their share; it's Very hard for a farm to make it more than 2 generations. So, instead of staying in the family, it gets sold for taxes (and the younger sib's Share).
Then, the son that wants to keep farming (my dad's dad) rents a farm, (with my dad helping), then when prices go down; grandpa couldn't make the rent, and my dad learned what it was like to work in Clinton (iowa) at the Massey Ferguson plant, making tractors for other people.
Then, however, he won the lottery (an all expense paid trip to Korea, to meet interesting people, in 1952). The lottery Also paid for him go to Ames, and get an engineering degree... so, hurray!
AllenS said...
I've known a lot of family farmers, and they all have one thing in common, they bitch about everything.
My favorite line in The Lord of The Rings; is when the hobbits a caught trespassing on Farmer Maggot's land. Maggot, being a good character, has them all for dinner (instead of siccing his dogs on them). While eating, Tolkien writes:
After discussing farm prospects, which were no worse than normal..."
Serious Question?
Was Farmer Maggot a family farmer?
He owned, his land; and his sons worked it with him;
BUT!
He owned a good sized chunk of the Marish area of the East Farthing
He had SEVERAL farmhands that worked for him.
I've known a lot of family farmers, and they all have one thing in common, they bitch about everything.
My grandparents were farmers outside Wisconsin Dells. Grandpa was a crabby noodge who worked his ass off, as did my more nurturing grandmother. She was the daughter of a very successful farmer, but told all five of her daughters not to marry one because it was a very hard life.
My grandparents sold the farm when they retired because no one in the family wanted to farm. Part of the problem was that it was all manual labor all the time. Grandpa was not very innovative or imaginative. My aunts complained that he could have been a multi-millionaire if he bought land (e.g., downtown Dells, the banks of the Wisconsin river) that was later worth a fortune.
Sometimes more innovative and entrepreneurial people make a bigger difference than hard workers with their nose to the grindstone.
I've known a lot of family farmers, and they all have one thing in common, they bitch about everything.
Farmers are no different than other professional in that respect. Like rappers and longshoreman and the "F" word. A verbal tic, audible filler. Making conversation is about asking the right question. Bitching about the wet, late planting season? Ask about what they are going to do to adjust. Change crops, different varieties, tillage options. They would rather talk about solutions, if you can redirect.
I’m selling our family’s plastic straw farm if anyone knows of a buyer...
Why small farms? Because large livestock operations stink and nothing healthy is going to come from that miasma.
"Why small farms? Because large livestock operations stink and nothing healthy is going to come from that miasma."
Yes.
"I've known a lot of family farmers, and they all have one thing in common, they bitch about everything."
Everybody bitches about everything! What do you think goes on here every day?
You, bitching about us everyday, Mr Cook.
Let us not lose sight that China acting it it's national interest is looking to reduce depending on adversarial countries for food imports. The US and China are adversarial nations. Not for nothing China is looking to expand its food imports from Brazil, other Latin American countries and from Africa. Even if Trump had been sweetness and light from the first day China would still have looked to rely less on the US for food imports. The rich Arab countries are are also pursuing a similar policy of buying large tracts of farmland in Africa for the very same reason. That said, food is largely a commodity and commodities are fungible so the US will more or less maintain it's food exports at roughly the same dollar value. One also has to keep in mind food equals water and the US in addition to having the acreage and the climate needed for such large amounts of production also has the water. The Chinese are probably starting to realize that the Democrats are too left to win and that Trump will get reelected and that they will have to strike a deal with him and that the deal struck will not be reversed to China's favor by the president following Trump. This is also going to start sinking into the minds of the Europeans.
Family farms provide the Manichaean binaries I can’t find anywhere else, and so I make everything agricultural. They say that agriculturalism is rigid and authoritarian. I say to them: Yes! I want agriculturalism. Please wrap me in that mystery, inside Enigma.
The Chinese are probably starting to realize that the Democrats are too left to win and that Trump will get reelected and that they will have to strike a deal with him and that the deal struck will not be reversed to China's favor by the president following Trump
Yes, the Chinese are serious people. They must wonder if Democrats are all crazy. Answer, yes they are,
Osso Negro 100% agreement with you as a small business owner. I don't see why as a small privately held business should have to pay a higher tax rate on balance as a C corp ( I'm a Subchapter S) and if were to be cute and charge a lot of my personal expenses to the business like execs at large public companies I would be looking at a huge imputed income tax bill plus fines and interest.
Some Doonesbury strips about the Family Farm, here, as well as a Mike Peters cartoon about David Stockman
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245591/m1/2/
interesting:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09-06/where-august-jobs-were-who-hiring-and-who-isnt-and-retail-apocalypse
and furthermore,
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/09/u-s-economy-only-adds-130000-jobs-in-august/#comments
Blogger Michael K said...
The Chinese are probably starting to realize that the Democrats are too left to win and that Trump will get reelected and that they will have to strike a deal with him and that the deal struck will not be reversed to China's favor by the president following Trump
Yes, the Chinese are serious people. They must wonder if Democrats are all crazy. Answer, yes they are,"
The Chinese indeed are a serious people and that is why they are pursuing One Belt One Road program, their food import diversification program and building a Blue Water Navy. They themselves have millions upon millions who want to get off the farm and live better but still need to eat. Even if China were to become a Western style Democracy tomorrow we would still have an adversarial relationship with them. Not as bad, but adversarial all the same. Let's not lose sight of the fact the EU was created to be a counterweight to the US and they aren't always that friendly in economic terms to the US and are often adversarial to the US. What Trump is doing is reminding the rest of the world that the US is now acting in its national interest just like them. Nothing personal, just business.
"The Chinese have to be looking at this with dismay. "How did we ally ourselves with these crazies ?"
They aren't the only ones.
The Chinese have one winning play, and it requires Trump losing in 2020. Same as the Democrats. It's amazing how much the Chinese, the Iranians, the North Koreans and pretty much every other enemy of the United States has in common with the Democrats. Trump is their biggest problem. So who you gonna vote for? I mean if you are an American.
Does NO ONE care about the small buggy whip maker?
The small black smith?
The small type setter?
Oh,Iowa isn't known for these professions? Oh, they are a minuscule voting block?
Never mind.
If China was a free democratic market economy they would dominate the world after walking right over us. Thank God for totalitarianism.
Re: cubanbob:
Let us not lose sight that China acting it it's national interest is looking to reduce depending on adversarial countries for food imports. The US and China are adversarial nations. Not for nothing China is looking to expand its food imports from Brazil, other Latin American countries and from Africa. Even if Trump had been sweetness and light from the first day China would still have looked to rely less on the US for food imports.
Up to a point -- I don't think food imports are a major national security issue, though.
I don't think Trump's thinking on this point is super complex. I would guess he is thinking back to the last big war. There were all kinds of strategic errors by the Japanese Navy, but big picture, we won the war because (1) our manufacturing capacity vastly outstripped Japanese manufacturing capacity (by something like 10x), and (2) we were their primary supplier for the metal and oil they had been using for the invasion of China (1937-1945). Once we cut them off in 1941, they had only a few months until they simply ran out of the oil necessary to operate their armies -- something that in fact happened in the last year of the war.
If we end up in a long war, we'll need to be able to replenish any losses of weapons or materiel through secure supply chains, which means if we're fighting China, we can't allow ourselves to be dependent on Chinese inputs, whether that's steel or 5G modems or whatever. The Pentagon has not seemed particularly concerned about this (possibly because they already have intensive supply chain management precisely to mitigate this risk, alongside the ECA and ITAR, etc.), but I think the President's thinking here is more broad strokes: he wants to cut back on US manufacturing in China because every US factory relocated to China strengthens China and weakens the US. The end.
We have small family farms in my area. Along with large family family farms and corporate farms. And orchards, most family run. The small family farms are all Amish. Can't run anything larger with literal horsepower.
he wants to cut back on US manufacturing in China because every US factory relocated to China strengthens China and weakens the US. The end.
Exactly. Obama did the opposite, if anything, because he was not concerned with the welfare of America. Other than himself, I have never figured out whose loyalty his was. Not to us, certainly. Maybe the people who were his sponsors. The Ayers family ?
Mr. Forward said...
Why small farms? Because large livestock operations stink and nothing healthy is going to come from that miasma.
"Large livestock operation" is a very subjective definition. I find it hard to believe you have been close enough to smell a large livestock operation. Most are putting them 1/4 mile from public roads, just for that reason, and 1 mile from a private house. Having grown up on a small diversified family farm, I'll tell you today's operation are so much better than the world I grew up in, as to not be identifiable as the same basic operations, odor wise.
In the same day I was with 1/2 mile of Mennonite farms raising all the different livestock, and large hog confinement operations. The Mennonites were far more objectionable.
This is why, on my dad's side; we don't have any farms. but, it would go like this
Greatgrandpa had a farm; he died, the daughter wanted HER share; so did the government: so it was sold
(other ggp had a farm; he died, the daughter wanted HER share; so did the government; so it was sold
Yes, but the good ole days, leftist pine for, fixed that problem by leaving all the land, equipment, and most of the cash, to the oldest male child,(that was not mentally, physically, or morally deficient). Another example of leftist not understanding exactly what they are wishing for.
perhaps prince talal, who spotted him the rials for his higher education, who subsequently ended up on the board of citigroup, where he helped select the Obama cabinet, in the latest Gabriel allon,
you have a prince salman manqué, who receives a warning about an approach by a khashoggi type, he consults one of his brothers, who tells him to kill the intruder, who bears a notice of caution, of course, the brother through a rather complicated series of events becomes crown prince,
Gilber - Was your roomie from Floyd County, IA? If so, any chance he was from the Staudt clan that is (essentially) the populace of said Floyd County? My Dad hails from Floyd County, outside Marble Rock. Over time, the Staudts have wound up farming (as rental) most of my extended family's farms in that area. A microcosm of what's happened all over farm country - the family who could convince their offspring to keep farming has taken over management of vast tracts of land from those who couldn't. Large family factory farms are the norm. And they're not struggling because of tariffs, despite the easy to write and horribly misleading stories that run in the big city papers.
And John Mellencamp is probably dusting off "Rain on the Scarecrow" just like back in his glory days when Reagan was "destroying the family farms".
Gilban - not gilber. Sorry 'bout that. Frickin autocorrect.
mcgregor brothers, down by Nashua
so, they're split between floyd and chickasaw counties; but i didn't want to drive to spell chicasaw. It always pissed me off that his license plates said floyd, but he said he was from nashua.
Let's say the Dems somehow fool the family farmers into believing they offer a better trade policy. They'll still have to convince farmers they were just joking about grabbing guns, paying reparations, raising taxes, increasing the price of diesel by 10x (with the Green New Deal), cheerleading (and spending tax money) for abortions, denouncing Christianity, and glorifying all things transgender. Ain't no way any of the farmers I know are falling for it.
I seem to be alone in noticing the hypocrisy of Benny Wikler extolling the Wisconsin family farm just the day after the Democrat candidates spent seven hours on CNN talking about the need to get rid cattle (cow farts being a greenhouse gas) and putting laws in place to restrict our intake of meat and dairy products.
another iowan said...
Yes, but the good ole days, leftist pine for, fixed that problem by leaving all the land, equipment, and most of the cash, to the oldest male child,(that was not mentally, physically, or morally deficient). Another example of leftist not understanding exactly what they are wishing for.
for some reason, no one in my family tree did that; instead, they'd divide it up 'fairly'; the result being that i have LOTS of great aunts and great great aunts with families that No ONE has ever talked to, or about.
My dad's mom's brother (his uncle; but not his dad's side) had a Wonderful farm down in Jackson county. When he died, he gave it 'evenly' to his two kids (my dad's cousins). The boy had to take a (nearly) ruinous mortgage to be able to buy his sister out. He kept the farm (in near poverty, thanx to mortgage) and lost his sister. He worked full time in Maquoketa at the FS, and rented out the farm. After years and years he got/kept his head above water. On her deathbed, he talked to his sister again.
I don't know how it should have been divided, but it shouldn't have divided THEM.
Personally, blame inheritance taxes (but i'm blissfully ignorant of how things worked in 1970)
On the other side, (my mom's side); when she passes, my sister and i will each get a share in the farm; and we'll keep it rented out like you're supposed to do : )
I need to correct something from earlier. None of the Democrat contenders are proposing an end to ethanol. In other words, climate change is a catastrophic existential crisis that will end life on Earth in (how many?) years unless we act NOW!!!...
(...but let's not be so hasty getting rid of support for that corn subsidy we need to win in Iowa)
"The Chinese are probably starting to realize that the Democrats are too left to win...."
Nope. Their problem is they aren't left enough to win. See Hillary Clinton, 2016. Joe Biden today. Both mainstream establishmentarians and loyal friends to the Military/Corporate Complex. Even Sanders and Warren, the two "big lefties" (true only in relative terms) have voted to increase the budget of the already grossly over-budgeted War Department.
Nope. Their problem is they aren't left enough to win.
Cook not only has his own political party. He has his own country where that shit is popular.
Now that Venezuela has had a taste of your politics, where next?
"Does NO ONE care about the small buggy whip maker?
The small black smith?
The small type setter?
Oh,Iowa isn't known for these professions? Oh, they are a minuscule voting block?
Never mind."
Here is some interesting history, at one time the old Studebaker car company made wagons which was the genesis for the Studebaker Automobile Co."During the height of westward migration and wagon train pioneering, half of the wagons used were Studebakers. They made about a quarter of them, and manufactured the metal fittings for other builders in Missouri for another quarter-century." After getting into auto manufacture, they sold their wagon business to the Louisville Wagon Company.
Robert Cook said...
Nope. Their problem is they aren't left enough to win.
REALLY? you REALLY think that IF the democrat tilted further left, that THEN they'd win?
I'd like to apologize for earlier calling you a liar; you have to be (at least) minimally coherent to be able to be a liar. You're Deranged.
I'd point out some math to you; but, What would be the point?
"Does NO ONE care about the small buggy whip maker?
The small black smith?
The small type setter?
Oh,Iowa isn't known for these professions? Oh, they are a minuscule voting block?
Well,
Clear Lake Iowa Built Univac (and then Unisys) Mainframe computers
That's long gone
What about the family liquor stores and quickie marts?
Who's gonna save them?
Cookie said..."Nope. Their problem is they aren't left enough to win. See Hillary Clinton, 2016. Joe Biden today."
The country is not voting for no cars and no plane flights. You're delusional.
Sorry.
Wow. What a dumb post.
I think this is actually your dumbest - which is saying a lot.
Our mercantilist TV preznit takes the bizarre view that trade wars are good and easy to win, and throws our nation's farmers into destitution to prove it.
The Democrats (and everyone else) oppose this economic mayhem, and by opposing it you accuse them of not having anything to offer?
Wow.
What a drama queen you are.
Family farms are important for the same reason that jobs and other personal assets or income streams are important. They provide dignity and a source of income and property to many actual people and their families, rather than just concentrating those things in the hands of a few faceless robber-barons.
You seriously have trouble understanding this?
Not to mention the fact that factory farms are disgusting.
It's funny how you never let your naiveté or ignorance about something so simple get in the way of having a strong opinion about it.
There's this fetish about small businesses (and on top of that a romanticism about the family business), but I don't see why the government is involved in preserving smallness.
It's not a fetish. It's an indicator of job growth and a way to preserve socially healthy communities, rather than the vast industrial wastelands and methamphetamine labs of all the burned-out rural small towns that voted for Trump for mostly this reason.
You are SHELTERED! Get out of that bubble.
Post a Comment