The economic paradox of agriculture production is that, while modern farming methods enable bountiful production to satisfy the population's needs, such abundance also drives the market price below the cost of production, with the potential of driving too many farmers out of production. The fundamental purpose of crop subsidies is to assure that doesn't happen, and helps us avoid the widespread hunger and famine that would result if it did.
It is in each nation's best self-interest to be as self-sufficient at providing its own food supply as its climate and natural resources permit. While every nation should be encouraged to trade and share their surplus, NO nation, including our own, should accept importation of food products that undercut domestic production.
ping
Bump.
CHRISTIANITY means not hurting our poor breathren by undercutting their way of producing a livable income
Killing subsidies is a HUGE problem to the TINY FARM farmers of europe. These are small land owners whose small farms are just as important to them as our own farms/homes.
Many have zero reasonable means of keeping their family farm and obtaining other employment. IOW there is NOTHING else they can do for income.
Why is this important. Many of these uneducated farmers have been sucker by banks (german french among others) with 0% interest loans. These same banks petition to cut farm susidies with the EU and individual nations. This means the farmers can make the 0% loan and are forclosed. Since these small farms grow much the same thing to be able to share the picking efforts, it ends up with large chunks being forclosed. The the parcels are consolodated.
Many of these are not lazy, just outclassed ecconomically by their own people, outclassed techwise in the 21st century, and just no way for their governments to have considered what to do with their own farmers.
European nations geneally screw their farmers to achieve their commie social engineering. The farmers then have a history of lining the nearest eurocrats along the nearest wall.
Ping
Where does a big city newspaper get it's expertise on farming. On a Sunday drive through the countryside? How can the newspaper claim farming is so inefficient and in need of subsidy when airlines and public transportation also requires federal subsidy to remain in operation? How about big steel mills in Pitt? How much subsidy do they get for their products? Perhaps federal subsidy of all business should end and then we could really see the impact of how much influence a government "we the people" subsidy has on everyday life.
As for feeding the rest of the world, apparantly our "inefficient farming system" is among the most efficient in the world if we are able to export billions of dollars worth of food items to the rest of the "efficient but starving " world.