Hmmm. I am quite curious to know how many farmers that you personally know who are "addicted to their subsidies." The ones I know and work for aren't living high on the hog.
Think a little harder about why so much money would be funneled towards subsidizing. Corporations should come to mind, not my neighbor in the field on his tractor.
A couple of points from an older article you might read:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1763.cfm
"Eligibility for farm subsidies is determined by crop, not by income or poverty standards. Growers of corn, wheat, cotton, soybeans, and rice receive more than 90 percent of all farm subsidies: Growers of nearly all of the 400 other domestic crops are completely shut out of farm subsidy programs. Further skewing these awards, the amounts of subsidies increase as a farmer plants more crops.
Thus, large farms and agribusinesses--which not only have the most land, but also are the nation's most profitable farms because of their economies of scale--receive the largest subsidies. Meanwhile, family farmers with few acres receive little or nothing in subsidies. Farm subsidies have evolved from a safety net for poor farmers to America's largest corporate welfare program.""A glance at those who received farm subsidies in 2002 shows that many of them do not need federal dollars. Table 2 shows the 12 Fortune 500 companies that received farm subsidies in 2002. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance's $2.3 million farm subsidy payment was by far the largest among these companies. The farm subsidies granted to these Fortune 500 companies since 1995 are--on average--70 times larger than those granted to the median farmer.""Table 3 lists the nine Members of Congress who received farm subsidies in 2002. Since 1995, these lawmakers have received subsidies averaging 46 times those received by the median farmer. Five of the nine lawmakers also sit on the House or Senate agriculture committees overseeing these programs.""Table 4 details other notable farm subsidy recipients, including:
* David Rockefeller, the former chairman of Chase Manhattan and grandson of oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller, who received 99 times more subsidies than the median farmer;
* Scottie Pippen, professional basketball star, who received 39 times more subsidies than the median farmer;
* Ted Turner, the 25th wealthiest man in America, who received 38 times more subsidies than the median farmer; and
* Kenneth Lay, the ousted Enron CEO and multi-millionaire, who received 3 times more subsidies than the median farmer."
My use of the term "addicted" was meant in the EXACT same way when used towards folks who only live off welfare.
Farmers at this point don't know how to exist without the subsidies. PERIOD. The farmer my Father-In-Law works for, if you count all the properties they farm, get an incredible amount from the government.
There was a release of such data a couple of years ago. All you had to do was go to a web site (don't remember it now) and look up farms/farmers in your county. Sometimes you had to know all the names the farmer operated under (often family land/leased land/partner's land/etc. are listed seperately).
As far as living "high on the hog", it really depends on what you mean...
If that means they live in a VERY nice home, with brand new high-dollar vehicles every year, and two or three teenagers with brand new vehicles, then maybe they are... I guess it depends on your point of view.
YEs, htere are farmers who live from check-to-check. But then again - why?
What amazes me - crop prices for crops around here have remained at historic lows (with a few surprise spikes in soy beans a time or two because of crop problems in South America). Yet the products made from said crops are not necessarily cheaper.
I'm not sure how many farmers are going to make it this year - with record fuel prices cutting into the thin margin many work on.