Posted on 09/04/2013 1:51:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Denver Post warns, "Milk, food prices could rise if Congress fails to act."
Congress is working on a farm bill, which, among other things, will set limits on how high or low milk prices can be in different regions of the country.
Politicians from both parties like to meddle in agriculture. When the Heritage Foundation told Republicans not to pass any farm bill, "conservative" politicians banned Heritage from their weekly meetings.
But why should politicians be involved in agriculture? Why should they set food prices, any more than they set the price of books or staplers? The market decides most prices, so we don't have to wait with bated breath for politicians to make up their minds.
In a normal market, sellers charge the highest price their customers will pay -- and then lower the price when they lose customers to sellers who charge less. Competition keeps prices low, not generosity or warm-heartedness. Or government.
The price of milk, on the other hand, is decided by regulators, using complicated formulas. They set one price for wholesale milk used to produce "fluid" products and another for milk used in making cheese. It's a ridiculous game of catch-up, in which the regulated prices never change as fast and efficiently as they would in a market, one buyer and seller at a time.
Next week, California will hold public hearings about milk price negotiations, as if more arguing will reveal the "correct" price. The agricultural news site Agri-View reports that dairy farmers filed a petition with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), demanding it implement an earlier, massive milk-price compact agreed to by cheesemakers and legislators.
Under the agreement, cheese processors must kick in an additional $110 million to a statewide pool of money used to pay dairy farmers, who are upset that they've been paid less than what farmers get in surrounding states.
Rob Vandenheuvel of the state's Milk Producers Council says, "Government has the responsibility to keep us in line with what the rest of the country is making, and they're not doing it. It gives us no choice but to spend money on lawyers."
Great. How many lawyers does it take to produce a gallon of milk?
The dairy farmers say some dairy farms lose money, which proves milk prices are too low. But cheesemakers say they can barely stay in business, proving milk prices are too high.
Why is any of this the legislature's business? It shouldn't be. Prices should be decided by buyers and sellers.
Prices are not just money. They're information. Rising prices tell farmers to produce more; that increases supply and prices go back down. Falling prices tell producers to invest in other products. This system works well for plums, peaches, cars and most everything we buy.
But bureaucrats and lobbyists say milk is "special."
Vandenheuvel says cows can't be subject to market demand because "there are several years of lead time between when you decide to buy a cow and when that cow produces milk."
The CDFA agrees because: "Milk is a perishable product and must be harvested daily," and "Milk continues to be viewed as a necessary food item, particularly for children."
I say, so what? It's not "lead time" or being "perishable" or even being "necessary" that makes milk unique. Plums and newspapers are perishable and harvested daily. It takes long lead times to build assembly lines to make cars. No entrepreneur has a guarantee of market demand once the factory is complete. All business is risky.
The CDFA wails that without price controls, "no other regulations would be in place to assure an adequate supply of milk."
Give me a break. It's in planned economies, like Venezuela, North Korea and the former Soviet Union that shortages occur. When politicians micromanage markets, consumers suffer.
Milk isn't "special." Almost no product is. Let competition set the price.
“Politicians from both parties like to meddle in agriculture. When the Heritage Foundation told Republicans not to pass any farm bill, “conservative” politicians banned Heritage from their weekly meetings. “
Yup. The gop wing of the uniparty doesn’t want anyone getting in the way of “business.”
After you allow the local givernments to charge you RENT(property tax) on property you OWN... EVERYTHING is downhill after that..
Everything..
The weirdest thing about agricultural price supports and controls is that they apply to some products and not others, with no apparent rationale for deciding which are covered.
Conservatives should not be pro-business.
We should be pro-market.
A monumentally ignorant remark. If a buy a producing cow this morning, she'll give me milk this afternoon.
From the article: Rob Vandenheuvel of the state’s Milk Producers Council says, “Government has the responsibility to keep us in line with what the rest of the country is making, and they’re not doing it. It gives us no choice but to spend money on lawyers.”
Uh...Rob, Dude! The government has NO responsibility to support your members’ cashflow in ANY way. In fact, their meddling up to this point is anti-Constitutional.
Stop suckling at the taxpayer teat, and get back to balancing the economic playing field with the always workable laws of supply and demand, and stop demanding the laws to assure your livelihoods.
There is no bigger anti-tax person than myself (especially living in NJ), but referring to property taxes as “rent” is misleading. I’m all for slashing government expenditures to the bone (and we’ve laid off thousands of gubmint workers here in NJ), but as long as people expect ANY services they should expect to pay for them. Our founding fathers didn’t want anyone voting who wasn’t paying taxes (owning property); they rightly felt others had much less at stake/at risk. One of the breakdowns occurring now (and it is killing the northeast) is that many young people are deciding not to invest in a home here (and who could blame them?); since they aren’t breeding and there are few good jobs nobody would buy here. As a result, we have a de facto amnesty to keep the homes and schools full.
At least with property taxes you have greater control (your vote is less diluted) and the funds are spent locally (instead of in some welfare hive).
I was going to tell you that you should have posted the entire quote, but that was in a different paragraph
It’s the same lame excuse the liberals use when the subject of drilling comes up. Oh it will take 10 years before the first drop of oil flows through the pipe line
I guarantee you Vandenheuvel would not be able to answer the question
At least with property taxes you have greater control (your vote is less diluted) and the funds are spent locally (instead of in some welfare hive).
Well you have been brain washed.. if you buy property taxes then you’ve sold the farm..
It is the “TELL” in the political poker game.. the odor of the skunk.. that you smell far before you see the animal..
Property taxes is indeed the rent you play the “real” landlord.. as a serf..
It is obvious straight forward and in your face..
First your money and then your wives and daughters..
and in a queer way your sons.. dog, cat, goats, sheep and cattle.. even your parakeet..
ALL political officials should be voluntary unpaid public servants..
Federal, State and Local.. the only tax should be sales and or excise taxes.. all Unions prohibited..
“ALL political officials should be voluntary unpaid public servants...Federal, State and Local.. the only tax should be sales and or excise taxes.. all Unions prohibited..”
How do you pay cops, and firemen if you use them? How do you fix public roads, sewers, etc? If there is nothing to pay for, then don’t tax me.
How do you pay cops, and firemen if you use them? How do you fix public roads, sewers, etc? If there is nothing to pay for, then don’t tax me.
Capitalism.. make them private for profit enterprises.. bid out..
Those that can not be made volunteer.. like firefighters and cops should be..
-OR- a few professionals but mostly volunteers.. maybe a few bid out projects as well..
There are many revenue options VERY unexplored..
Revenue needed ONLY when all other options have been tried..
The first question... Is this a project that should be even handled by Federal State or local government..?.
It Should BE HARD to get a gov’t project started NOT EASY...
Once started each project should have time limits which needs to be renewed or re-certificated..
NEVER over two or three fiscal years..
Coming from one of the highest-taxed states, I certainly agree with you in principle. I just don’t see people repairing their own roads.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.