Zcom_simple

Brad Wilson

Web Address: /zspace/bradwilson
Back

Subsidy Caps? Ag Biz vs. "Big Ag"


See here: the BIGest "Big Ag subsidies look big (but are Co-ops, ie. 9,000 members, so individual recipients are not really this big at all).


All subsidies must be put in the context of farm-price/price-floor drops. (Adjusted for inflation.) The yellow line is what Congress took from farmers, gave to Ag Biz (below prev. standard).


Same data: by decade. Clearly, farmers, big and small, got less, even with subsidies. Ag Biz gained. Consumers gained more from the farm share than they paid in subsidies. Vs. 1942-52!


Again, this time as percent of parity. Farmers got less, even with subsidies. Taxpayers as consumers netted a gain. Farmers subsidized them below fair trade, below costs. Congress did this!


Here, by decade, the trend is averaged out. Farmers lose, consumers gain. Corn is pauper, not "KING." Congress gave Ag Biz secret exploitation of farmers. Farmers got BLAME for Subsidies.


Hypothetical: 1995-2010: subsidies for top 4% of recipients reduced to level of top 5%. Wow, looks like MEGA fix of injustice!


Earlier, Ag Biz secretly gained from prices below 100% parity. They still do with subsidy caps! Payment Limit "Reform" does nothing to stop "cheap corn," exploitation of farmers by Ag Biz!


My hypothetical subsidy cap would have reduced all subsidy spending as shown here. These are reductions of compensatory subsidies to "Big Ag" farmers. Subsidies compensate all farmers (about 1/8) for massive reductions (8/8) that benefit Ag Biz (8/8).


Here I change scale, preparing to show "Big Ag" reductions in the context of "The Hidden Farm Bill," the secretly unaffected Ag Biz benefits. Yea, in that context, payment limits add up to bread crumbs, MEGA HIDDEN support for Ag Biz.


In the early aqua slides, you saw the HIDDEN Ag Biz benefits, in the MEGA reduction below the parity line, or below the 1942-1952 standard. This is slide 10. Click "close" then "Next" to see slides 11-15.

Loading_border