Posted on 08/09/2005 10:24:44 AM PDT by Hi Heels
That would be foolish.
While it is an imperfect solution, government price support of agricultural commodities are what guarantee us a stable and abundant food supply. Without them, we'd fall back into the natural cycle of "feast or famine" that is inherent in agriculture.
Having a "wasteful" and economicly "inefficient" food surplus is a luxury that we can afford.
It sure beats the hell out of the riots that would accompany food shortages.
Like the new Energy Bill of 2005. FedGov controls industry by spending money here and there rather than letting the free market run its course. Big Business is the business of FedGov.
=======================================
This is a second struggle for emancipation . . . If America is not to have free enterprise, then she can have freedom of no sort whatever.
1912 campaign-- Woodrow Wilson --
========================================
Interesting that Conservatives agree with much of the Progressive platform
Should do well in CA, that's fer sure.
Well, now that's just nuts!
Care to suplement my food budget to cover the over priced products I purchase to pay for theat wasteful and inefficient food surplus?
I didn't think so.
The gov't guarantees the price paid to peanut farmers. This, at a cost above present "market value."
So peanut users, like makers of peanut butter and peanut oil have to pay more for their inputs than they would if the market operated freely.
Hence, you pay tax dollars to support farmers, inflating what they get for the goobers. And then you pay higher prices at the market for the products made with the artificially-inflated peanuts.
SD
government crop program guarantees them $355 per tonAnd that's why we have a peanut surplus.
In other words, Congress created a subsidy and, surprise surprise, they got a whole lot more of what it was they intended to subsidise. This is basic economics. If the gov't is going to guarantee a price that is attractive, they will get a lot of takers.
If they started a program to buy used beer cans for 50 cents a piece, they'd get flooded with used beer can "farmers" claiming their subsidies.
SD
*snort*
Nope. It's your fair share of the insurance against shortages.
If you can't afford the "over priced" food products that are in surplus because of government subsidies,
then there's no way you'd ever be able to afford them when the prices skyrocket due to shortages in a "free market".
You'd starve.
So be happy that we have such bountiful overproduction.
Willie, you've made some hilarious posts in your day, and I've thoroughly enjoyed many of them, but this one tops them all. Food riots if we didn't have government price supports?? We're doomed to starvation if we don't have the Federal Government offer price supports? How did we ever survive our days as colonists and then all the way until FDR's Soviet-inspired New Deal without these supports?? LMAO!!!!!
Private insurance would be better. Keep the government out of it.
Where was the peanut allergy epidemic in the 60's and 70's when I went through public school? Why now? That's the part I don't get...
I like peanuts, Actually I like all kinds of nuts (except liberals), but everytime I look at the prices for a little bag or can of peanuts, I continue looking for an alternative snack.
***
They must be expensive...most of the airlines have discontinued those little bags of 2 peanuts each. :)
Let the markets dictate prices. Sheesh, subsidies are keeping nut prices so high it's just, well, NUTS.
What a surprise.
Kids used to play outside and roll around in dirt and, in general, expose themselves to all sorts of things. Now they live in heremetically-sealed homes with HEPA air filters and wash with anti-bacterial soap and allergies are through the roof.
They've proven that a simple thing like having a dog or cat can reduce your child's risk for developing allergies.
SD
I don't want to believe you are actually telling me that inefficient spending of taxpayer dollars is a good thing.
The subsidies should never have been started in the first place.........taxpayers supporting one segment of the population at the expense of another is not my idea of good, let alone smaller, government.
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.