Posted on 07/02/2016 8:56:40 AM PDT by Kaslin
On the Fourth of July we celebrate the country’s independence from Great Britain. We also honor the country’s founding and remember the unalienable rights to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” laid out in the Declaration of Independence. The Fourth marked the official start to a long fight against a tyrannical, distant government that abusively meddled with the lives of colonists.
This year, perhaps you’ll celebrate our hard-won freedoms by waving the flag, watching a parade, or enjoying fireworks.
But everyone will celebrate with food. So what better time is there to consider how the federal government currently meddles with what we eat?
No Fourth of July fare is more quintessential than barbecue, but agriculture policies mean that most of the food you’ll eat at your barbecue is subsidized by the federal government. So thank a taxpayer.
From the meat in your burger or hot dog to the buns you put them in, products of the agriculture industry benefit from a wide swath of corporate welfare policies. Even the local farmers’ market or simple roadside stand is subsidized. And farm subsidies don’t stop there—they even hit your corn on the cob, the cheese you slap on your burger, the milk in your ice cream, and the sugar in your iced tea.
We are a country founded on individual liberty. Is this bounty of government support for agriculture really necessary?
Supporters often evoke the plight of the struggling farmer as justification. Yet farms are actually doing quite well. Farm income has grown, farmers have less debt and more equity, and farm failures are quite rare. It doesn’t seem that farming is in the kind of dire straits that would even begin to justify the support it receives. Nor does it seem very fair. The typical farming household makes 19 percent more than the rest of the country and has 10 times more wealth.
The family farmer is a throwback to a bygone era. Today, large agribusinesses own the majority of farms. The largest 20 percent of farms received 73 percent of subsidies in 2012 while very few small farms receive any government support. Plus, some who get subsidies are exceedingly wealthy and not even primarily farmers.
So how did we get here? Understanding Washington’s farm policy is trickier today than it was a few years ago. Direct subsidy payments to farmers for simply growing certain crops like corn, wheat, cotton, or soy beans were sensibly abolished in the 2014 Farm Bill. But in their place, Congress created massive new crop insurance programs designed to prop up farm income and protect farmers from losses. The complicated formulas that dictate payments make the benefits more hidden than simply paying farmers for producing the crops that Washington favors.
And while insurance may sound harmless enough, the reality is that these programs protect farmers from almost any risk whatsoever. Put differently, the taxpayers are absorbing what should be the cost of doing business. This is wrong for any business or industry trying to earn a profit. Yet this move was touted as a major reform guaranteed to save billions of dollars. Sadly, the reverse has come true, with the new programs far outspending the old.
Farm subsidies are expensive. They are also inherently unfair—they transfer $20 billion in wealth each year from taxpayers to a small group of well-connected and influential famers. They also create bad incentives for farmers to chase the federal dollar rather than plan and manage risk themselves.
Let’s celebrate the Fourth of July with independence—independence from corporate welfare.
There ya go ...
You realize, of course, that that is the essential question behind ALL politics?
Happy Independence Day to you too, Alison!
The current sinful human condition is that of needing some kind of government.
But anyhow maybe I don’t grok what you are getting at, whether you are saying this is an unnecessary question or what.
Not at all. Rather I’m saying that it is a question that goes far beyond farming. Solve it, and you’ve basically solved all politics. The Founders recognized government as a necessary evil and thus sought not to create government power, but restrain it. It’s like fire - needed, but deadly. One match can destroy a forest. Likewise, one law can enslave a civilization.
There is no one size fits all answer.
But I think in the case of the USA, there could be a lot of room for privatization.
I think Donald Trump’s philosophy is an example of this. If I read it right, he doesn’t look to get rich for riches’ sake, but as being a steward of goodness that benefits far more people than himself.
The oinkers in government itself probably won’t greet this news with open arms at first, but forced to forage in a new economic model, they may eventually discover that they have found a more productive way of life than bureaucratic pencil pushing.
Well, I don’t do things to spite the Moose, though the Moose may do things that spite themselves, like their crazy jihads.
But do you top the pork roast with a turban of bacon, baptise it in BBQ sauce and name it Muhammad, and add a little chorizo named Aisha before you put it in the oven? ;)
It wasn’t God, but an evil demonic “Allah” who told Mohammed not to eat pork. That had only been forbidden to the Jews as part of the ritual Mosaic law.
Invite a Moose to your barbecue in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.
That street performer in the pig costume confronting the glowering muzzie is priceless!
Anyway, I looked into the author & the institutes she is affiliated with. Conservative & free enterprise oriented, near as I can tell.
So...why focus on pork to criticise federal farm subsidies and time it for the Fourth of July weekend when more pork is consumed than any other time of year? Did she intend to combine political pork, pork subsidies, AND the pork we enjoy as barbecue, in a single essay?
If so, not very clever & poorly timed, in my opinion.
Who gave you my secret recipe???
I think we can be grateful to God for “our daily pork” on our tables, at the same time being freshly mindful of the need to be better stewards of His blessings in the future. It isn’t all about us, in the end. It’s all about God, who even uses the humble pig.
"In 1778, General George Washington marked July 4 with a double ration of rum for his soldiers and an artillery salute. Across the Atlantic Ocean, ambassadors John Adams and Benjamin Franklin held a dinner for their fellow Americans in Paris, France." source: Wikipedia
click the pic
IMAM: How do you like Mohammad?
INFIDEL CHEF: Medium Well.
IMAM: You must like Mohammad VERY well!
INFIDEL CHEF: if he has enough fat to stay moist, and I can get his skin crispy enough...
Always spell it MO (re) HAM (makes him) MAD ;)
![](http://i.imgur.com/b3ZYnd1.jpg")
I’m not sure we don’t have it worse under Obama / Hillary / globalism over America than they had under King George. We don’t have much to celebrate. We apparently couldn’t keep our republic.
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.
