FDR began tinkering with the prices in the 1940s, but promised "parity" with other prices would be built into such tinkering. (He lied.)
It should be no surprise that Americans pay the least percentage of their income for food than any other country. You would be shocked if you looked at comodity income, (as to what the farmer/rancher gets for raw product,) in comparison with what he got 50 years ago. There is no appreciable difference. It is a scandal.
American farmers are seeing wave after wave of foreign growers dumping on an segment of the industry just like they have done with the steel industry. American growers can't compete and down come permanent orchards, etc. More and more fields are converted to tract housing and suburbs grow bigger and bigger.
Ask Carey Okie....Except for a few subsidized products with price supports, America has become a net importer of food. Think about that...we no longer grow enough food to feed our population. Think about that trend and how it impacts national security. Think about what that means for American international affairs and for trends toward globalization. Think about transfer of wealth to other nations, impact on world environments, health and safety standards for the food you eat, importation of pests.
Under basic economic theories, the entire economy rests on the foundation of supplying raw materials. Every dollar of raw material produced creates at least 7 dollars in the overall economy (value added.) It is the source of real wealth and it is renewable. Can't you see the shift to other countries and how this is affecting our standard of living and economy?
You whine about mechanics and farmers, but that is like comparing apples and rocks. Farmers have talked among themselves for a long time about striking to get a decent return on their product. Unfortunately, they live so tightly, and service such large debt, they can't. I almost wish they would just to bring to urban people's attention the fact that their entire "civilization" and economy rests on the shoulders of these hard-working folks.
websites on "parity": http://www.countrylovin.com/morefacts.html http://www.cnie.org/nle/crsreports/agriculture/ag-60.cfm http://www.normeconomics.org/parity.html http://waysandmeans.house.gov/fullcomm/106cong/4-13-00/4-13powe.htm
We already have ways of dealing with dumping -- tariffs. We do it all the time. However, don't call all importing "dumping."
"Ask Carey Okie....Except for a few subsidized products with price supports, America has become a net importer of food."
1996 Annual Report of the President of the United States on the Trade Agreements Program:
"Under basic economic theories, the entire economy rests on the foundation of supplying raw materials. "
Under about the most basic economic theory, specialization, if Mexico can grow oranges cheaper and better than we can, while in the U.S., we're moving to a more highly-developed, high-tech economy, then we should import Mexico's oranges. It makes no sense economically for us to continue to produce them.
"I almost wish they would just to bring to urban people's attention the fact that their entire "civilization" and economy rests on the shoulders of these hard-working folks."
This reminds me of the time in the Army. The fuel supply people telling tankers they'd get nowhere without them, the tankers saying that without them, there'd be no reason to be there, etc.
Our entire civilization rests on more than farmers. I'm in IT -- what would happen if all the comptuers went away? Cars? Electricity? Actually, I'd say the sewage treatment people are the most important.
Why is it that farmers are always accorded such special status? They're in a business just like the rest of us. If they can't make it, they should get out of the business. For the record, I mostly grew up in rural Colorado.
My solution: remove the price suports, subsidies and incentives for farmers to not grow crops (which in themselves shows you we grow too much -- maybe that land should be converted). Remove all but the basic food safety regulations. Then let, for example, milk be sold for what it's worth. Lots of farmers will go out of business, and lots of farmers will get rich. The prices will fluctuate wildly for a little while, then settle down to probably a little less than now. The plus side is no more tax dollars wasted.
It may be a somewhat radical solution, but then I'm a bit crazy. For some reason I thought we had a captialist system, not a socialist one.
On the issue of food production and national security, though, isn't it true that a very small percentage of our national meat supply is produced on open Western rangeland? Isn't the vast majority feedlot produced in places like Arkansas? If so, doesn't this really remove this aspect of the debate? Correct me if I'm wrong.