pShould farm subsidies be cut?

Next>

Results

44 %

Yes, across the board

32 %

Yes, some of them

20 %

No, they're essential

1 more option

@Mar '13 c 118 comments V 271 votes

Detailed Results Next Debate Vote Now

Activity Stmts Popular

271 Votes

Thu
Bill2E endorsed AntiPorcheria

v Yes, some of them
Wed
silentrunning endorsed NTBFW

v No, they're essential
u

May 15
Brogan voted

v Yes, some of them
May 14

TheLoneRanger

v Yes, across the board

Come on Politix! You gotta give me more options! My real answer is to eliminate farm subsides because they in part pay farms not to produce food. Then the government should seize the corporate farms and give them back to the families that they were stolen from.

Post
u

May 14
nagydonnac voted

v Yes, across the board
May 13

PJS1973

v Yes, some of them

I'm not comfortable with our economic policy shaping our diet; corn subsidies put corn into almost everything we eat today. I sympathize with the family farmer, but believe in a free market and don't think this program needs to be continued in perpetuity. Subsidize enough to maintain our capacity to produce, but cap anything beyond that.

Post
May 13
Fyi1957 endorsed NTBFW

v No, they're essential
u

May 12

Gatnos

v Yes, across the board

Let's recap the situation. Uncle Sam takes our money through taxation and gives it to farmers to subsidize their income and to keep the price of food down. Uncle Sam also gives farmers money to not grow certain crops to keep the prices stable. This is direct manipulation of the free market system and subsidizes food exports. Now, I'd much rather keep my tax money and let the free market system determine prices through supply and demand. Oh, BTW, the US Constitution does not empower the government to subsidize any industry, including farming.

B1

Post
u

May 12
skspls voted

v Yes, some of them
u

May 10
SlimElmo91 endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
u

May 10
hancel voted

v No, they're essential
u

May 10
Philof endorsed Carl

v Yes, some of them
May 10
Isabellealicia endorsed NTBFW

v No, they're essential
u

May 9
pezcore64 voted

v No, they're essential
u

May 9
LilliB voted

v Yes, across the board
u

May 9
Bill voted

v Yes, across the board
May 9
LEC endorsed PoliticalSpice

v I'm not sure
u

May 9
looncraz endorsed Carl

v Yes, some of them
May 9
oldtimer2 endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
u

May 9
iraya endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
May 7
that1guy voted

v Yes, across the board
May 7
RevJdubs316 endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
u

May 7
tomincali voted

v Yes, some of them
May 7
ZombieMedic voted

v Yes, some of them
May 6
joyshusband endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
May 6
Keystroke voted

v I'm not sure
May 5
DanielZ voted

v Yes, across the board
May 5
AndrewMC voted

v No, they're essential
u

May 4
mxdirtdude endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
May 4
Mournwolf voted

v Yes, across the board
May 3

Calfkiller

v Yes, across the board

It would be one hell of a reality check for the country. You wanna see how much your fuel and food really cost? We'd be drilling in every backyard for oil within six months. These subsidies are only covering up the politicians shenanigans.

Post
May 3
FFX_VA voted

v Yes, some of them
u

May 3

fraps

v Yes, across the board

No business should be subsidized by the government. If the business is worthwhile let the owner put moe at risk, find investors, or quit. Subsidies have the government picking winners and losers in addition to being park laden.

Post
u

May 3
PWM endorsed AntiPorcheria

v Yes, some of them
u

May 2
pmonteen voted

v Yes, some of them
u

May 2
kwwb voted

v No, they're essential
May 2

Mr_me

v No, they're essential

Farmers work long hard hours to provide us with food at affordable prices. These subsidies are the only making it possible for many small farmers. I'm not interested in big corporate farms. In time they would just hold our food ransom to get their way much like they do jobs now.

Post
u

u

May 1
farmer_bruce endorsed Carl

v Yes, some of them
o

May 1

josephb

v Yes, some of them

Give the family farmers subsidies. The family farmer is and was the backbone of American agriculture.Corporate agri-business doesn't deserve one penny of taxpayers money.

Post
u

May 1

n1wp

v Yes, some of them

Where there is no strategic need to raise a crop and we are paying folks not to plant a crop definitely yes.

Post
u

Apr 30
kgautreau voted

v Yes, across the board
u

Apr 30
DemonsAngel13 endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
Apr 30
loganrollo endorsed Speedieg

v Yes, across the board
Apr 29
Ddegnernm voted

v Yes, across the board
Apr 29
Utility57 voted

v No, they're essential
Apr 29

Laity1

v Yes, across the board

Whenever government tinkers, we end up getting that which we do not want. This has led to the demise of the family farm and poor husbandry - not rotating crops and the like. We get ethanol and pesticides and big-agra.

Post
u

u

Apr 29
treedcat25 endorsed Carl

v Yes, some of them
Apr 29

TheHandsomeOne

v Yes, across the board

Half this nations corn crop is not even digestable by humans unless made in to corn sugar. Horse Chit. We supply China with 60% of their food. Horse Chit. Cut them off and let them get back to growing food to take care of their own and leave manufacturing and ingenuity to the land of it, America. Hail farr, drop one of them surplus war toys on Three Goerges Dam and let's get this earth tilted back up on it's axis proper and turning it's correct speed. Fawkum and lettum eat water.

B1

Post
Apr 29
Reidabsher voted

v Yes, across the board
Apr 29

Prime_Meridian

v Yes, some of them

I'm in favor of the ones that pay farmers NOT TO GROW certain crops. There should be something else they can grow rather than just collect a big check for growing nothing. And if they're getting paid for not growing a certain crop, but are growing another at a profit, then what kind of a fool thing is cutting them a check?!

Post

May 14

TheLoneRanger

v Yes, across the board

Come on Politix! You gotta give me more options! My real answer is to eliminate farm subsides because they in part pay farms not to produce food. Then the government should seize the corporate farms and give them back to the families that they were stolen from.

Post
May 13

PJS1973

v Yes, some of them

I'm not comfortable with our economic policy shaping our diet; corn subsidies put corn into almost everything we eat today. I sympathize with the family farmer, but believe in a free market and don't think this program needs to be continued in perpetuity. Subsidize enough to maintain our capacity to produce, but cap anything beyond that.

Post
u

May 12

Gatnos

v Yes, across the board

Let's recap the situation. Uncle Sam takes our money through taxation and gives it to farmers to subsidize their income and to keep the price of food down. Uncle Sam also gives farmers money to not grow certain crops to keep the prices stable. This is direct manipulation of the free market system and subsidizes food exports. Now, I'd much rather keep my tax money and let the free market system determine prices through supply and demand. Oh, BTW, the US Constitution does not empower the government to subsidize any industry, including farming.

B1

Post
May 3

Calfkiller

v Yes, across the board

It would be one hell of a reality check for the country. You wanna see how much your fuel and food really cost? We'd be drilling in every backyard for oil within six months. These subsidies are only covering up the politicians shenanigans.

Post
u

May 3

fraps

v Yes, across the board

No business should be subsidized by the government. If the business is worthwhile let the owner put moe at risk, find investors, or quit. Subsidies have the government picking winners and losers in addition to being park laden.

Post
May 2

Mr_me

v No, they're essential

Farmers work long hard hours to provide us with food at affordable prices. These subsidies are the only making it possible for many small farmers. I'm not interested in big corporate farms. In time they would just hold our food ransom to get their way much like they do jobs now.

Post
o

May 1

josephb

v Yes, some of them

Give the family farmers subsidies. The family farmer is and was the backbone of American agriculture.Corporate agri-business doesn't deserve one penny of taxpayers money.

Post
u

May 1

n1wp

v Yes, some of them

Where there is no strategic need to raise a crop and we are paying folks not to plant a crop definitely yes.

Post
Apr 29

Laity1

v Yes, across the board

Whenever government tinkers, we end up getting that which we do not want. This has led to the demise of the family farm and poor husbandry - not rotating crops and the like. We get ethanol and pesticides and big-agra.

Post
Apr 29

TheHandsomeOne

v Yes, across the board

Half this nations corn crop is not even digestable by humans unless made in to corn sugar. Horse Chit. We supply China with 60% of their food. Horse Chit. Cut them off and let them get back to growing food to take care of their own and leave manufacturing and ingenuity to the land of it, America. Hail farr, drop one of them surplus war toys on Three Goerges Dam and let's get this earth tilted back up on it's axis proper and turning it's correct speed. Fawkum and lettum eat water.

B1

Post
Apr 29

Prime_Meridian

v Yes, some of them

I'm in favor of the ones that pay farmers NOT TO GROW certain crops. There should be something else they can grow rather than just collect a big check for growing nothing. And if they're getting paid for not growing a certain crop, but are growing another at a profit, then what kind of a fool thing is cutting them a check?!

Post
u

Apr 27

URBS

v Yes, some of them

The small farmer still may need the help but the big corporate farms don't need it they are the reason that the small family farm is dying.

Post
Apr 26
Post Removed by Moderators
Apr 26

VVP

v Yes, some of them

I would say they are essential given the plight of the American farmer, but it is hard to have too much sympathy when many of those small farms are the ones who help prop up illegal immigration. I know its tough to make ends meet and all but if they were getting subsidies (which relatively few of the small ones were) and still hiring illegal immigrants then it is not logical to keep providing subsidies that end up hurting Americans as much as it helps. Perhaps redistribution of subsidies from corporate farms to smaller farms MIGHT be in order but only if they are checked for illegal workers.

Post
Apr 25

Aftermath

v No, they're essential

Only if you want to pay more for food.

Post
u

Mar '13

norezen

v Yes, across the board

Yes to crop insurance. No to subsidies.

Post
u

Mar '13

pete314

v No, they're essential

Wow, people. We need farms. What happened to the small, family owned farms? These people rely on these subsidies. If not for them, most years these farmers wouldn't make a profit. If you cut subsidies, small farms are done.

Post
Mar '13

Russell797

v No, they're essential

If left to their own, farmers will plant the most profitable produce over and over again on the same land. This practice depletes the soil of essential nutrients and will damage the productivity of that land. Different plant should be rotated on the land, or the land should be allowed to grow wild for some time. The Gov. pays the farmers to do this for the betterment of us all, while keeping the farmer profitable. That's my understanding anyway.

r7 replies

Post
Mar '13

Canoochee

Let me make sure I understand you here. What you are saying is most farmers are too stupid to do what is best for the long term future of their business so they must have government help? Did I get it right?

Post @Canoochee
Mar '13

Russell797

@Canoochee It's not being stupid, it's being trapped in an economic reality. Very little of our economy is long term based, you know that. It's not just agriculture either, look at the fish stocks. They have been over harvested and depleted by over 90% in some cases. The government steps in with regulations to save the commercial fishing stocks from overfishing, and the fishermen go bananas. Why? Because the next catch is what puts food on the table.

Post @Russell797
Mar '13

Canoochee

@Russell797 I see what you are saying. Not that I agree, but, I see it. I worked for a farmer growing up. He and the other farmers I knew practiced crop rotation religiously. They preached it. Not doing so is stupid and unless the government intervenes stupidity is not rewarded. A farmer that ruined his land ruined his livelihood. On the other hand things may be different now. I know that corn is being grown by many almost to the exclusion of any other crop. Why? Because of government subsidies to promote ethanol. Consequently any product that contains corn, corn by products or that feeds on corn has seen it's price sky rocket.

Post @Canoochee
Mar '13

Russell797

@Canoochee I agree with you regarding corn being so heavily utilized as a source crop for the production of ethanol. Hopefully, switchgrass and genetically altered bacteria can take over the lead role in providing for ethanol.

Post @Russell797
Mar '13

Canoochee

@Russell797 I hope it will go away all together. There is no benefit to Ethanol if you are not involved in growing corn or converting it to Ethanol. We should be subsidizing nothing. You get more of the behavior you reward. Subsidies often end up with consequences not thought of by the ones who propose them.

Post @Canoochee
View all 7 replies >
u

Mar '13

BossTweed

v Yes, some of them

Take the time to ask your Representative if THEY voted for the Tobacco subsidies buried in the Farm Subsidy Bills. Why didn't they remove those subsidies before passage. They all rant against smoking but we pay millions in subsidies to tobacco farmers each and every year. Huh??

r1 reply

Post
Apr 29

TheHandsomeOne

Amen, and there is not much worse than a pious welfare(subsidy) drawing inherited land-poor farmer (with lush lands seeded and fertilized by the people with ponds stocked by the people ETC ETC ETC) preaching about the evil scumbags and their pitful Snap cards while perched loftily on his $70,000 Cummins or Powerstroke 4x4, which can be written off in a single year's return (try that with your hybrid).... except windbags like earl who sucked their live's wages and cushy retirement off the people while being overpaid doing a job that should have been private sector to begin with.... while pretending they are actual entrepreneurs that produced something to benefit society...

Post @TheHandsomeOne
u

Mar '13

Romney_Rube

v Yes, across the board

It's time to initiate a nationwide and massive "Hose the Farmer" program while ending these worthless ethanol subsidies too.

Post
R Load more comments...

Mar '13

Speedieg

v Yes, across the board

Farm subsidies should be altered to only support small family farms and only in a limited amount. This was the primal goal and is still worthy of support. Big business farms need to go it on their own.

B2

r1 reply

e28 endorsed

Post
u

Mar '13

Carl

v Yes, some of them

I'm not concerned about corporate farms, they can make up the money through other business processes. I'm concerned about Family Farms. This is one of the very few times where I think we need to be careful with what they produce. If we allow to many farms to fail, we put a strain on our food production. All it takes is to put enough farms at risk or out of business and couple that with three or four bad crop years and we can end up facing starvation and high food prices. To be honest I don't have a really great answer just a concern that we don't allow people to starve.

B3

r2 replies

e20 endorsed

Post
o

Mar '13

NTBFW

v No, they're essential

Do you your food prices to double? To only have large corporate farms?

r18 replies

e13 endorsed

Post
o

Mar '13

NavinRJohnson

v Yes, across the board

Subsidies for every industry should be removed. If it's not profitable for a business to compete fairly they shouldn't be in business.

B1

r2 replies

e12 endorsed

Post
Mar '13

AntiPorcheria

v Yes, some of them

Subsidies to corporate farms need to end. Corporate farms typically displace 10 - 50 farm families that get pressured to sell and often at a loss. Subsidies to independent farm families to produce REQUESTED crops should continue. Subsidies paid to farmers to let the fields stand bare should end.

B2

r1 reply

e8 endorsed

Post
Mar '13

DogLady_1

v Yes, some of them

A few issues concern me: 1) 90% of all farm subsidies go to big corporate farming operations that use chemicals and gene modification on their crops. I'd prefer to see subsidies for family/private farms that grow natural food with nutritional value instead of vectors for cancer and other diet-related diseases. 2) Farm subsidies come up to about $35 billion a year... eliminating them is not enough to save us from this financial crisis, but hey, we gotta reduce funding where we can. 3) Subsidies inflate land value and food costs. Eating is something that shouldn't break a family's or a farmer's budget! 4) Putting farmers on welfare if there is lowered demand for their cr...

B2

e5 endorsed

Post
u

Mar '13

Blessed

v No, they're essential

Without farmers, there would be no food. Farming is a hard job that requires working long hours in all kinds of weather. If a crop fails, the farmer loses the money spent on seeds, ferterlizer, fuel and etc, not to mention his time. Keep the subsidies coming!

e6 endorsed

Post
Mar '13

Thegrif

v No, they're essential

You people better hook the guy up who fills the fridge! What are you crazy? You wanna see panic? Let the groceries stop comin in the door.

r4 replies

e4 endorsed

Post
Mar '13

mwr

v Yes, some of them

independant family farms should have access to subsidies and support, COOP and large company/corp farms should not.

B1

e3 endorsed

Post
Mar '13

WMCOL

v Yes, across the board

Those "farmers" who get billions in subsidies to own millions of acres just to let the land lie barren producing no crops or jobs should definitely see their welfare benefits cut.

B1

e3 endorsed

Post

Politix

pShould farm subsidies be cut?

Results