A similar plan to cut subsidies for fossil and nuclear power and then use half of the savings for direct tax incentives to consumers to install wind and solar systems and buy plugin vehicles.  And use the other half of corporate welfare cuts to pay down the deficit.

Politicians voting to cut corporate welfare?  How could that happen?  

And how about those huge new fuel farming subsidies?  The worst of both worlds, energy and agribizz corporate welfare combined.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

I'm glad to see you don't propose simply washing away all subsidies, end of story.

We all know what kind of a place a "free" market can be.

Diana

"we don't need farmers on welfare"

The farmers are not the ones on welfare, the corporations are on welfare.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

If you're not careful, you won't have farmers at all.

Many say they hate public corporate farming, saying that such farms just care about the bottom line, have no respect for the land they farm, and are totally impersonal.  But of course that is what they are, that is their nature, and to expect anything else is to seek milk from a coke machine.

Small farmers are committed to their human scaled operations generally operated by family members and maybe a few hired hands who have been with the family for sometime.  They farm the land so that it can be preserved.  Any small farmer who does not maintain their land will not be able to continue farming very long.

Take away the farm program and it will be the ones who watch the bottom line and take advantage of externalities to reduce its operating costs who will win and those who work on the human scale who will fail.

Farming is a good life and there is not much money in it, there is a sense of self-reliance.  Farmers pray alot, it is part of the job and one of the better risk management tools they have.  It is a way of life that once extinct will be as hard to recover as any other life form.

Our farm system is rooted in 20th century methods.  It is going to have to change dramatically.  Trucking food a thousand miles as the normal course of business is not durable.  Subsidies help us as a society shape this change.  It is one of the tools governments use to define what that government stand for, what it values, and where such a society seeks to find its future.

Subsidies might be poor business, but they are a part of good government.

The current subsidy system encourages unnecessary overproduction and with it rates of obesity. I do agree with 'farmers on welfare'. If ya can't grow corn without massive subsidies from the guvment, then why the hell ya growing it? Grow something else, ranch them cows, whatever.

Where are all the subsidies going? Corn and soy are the biggest takers. No need for that.

Tom Philpott,
If there is no one farming, where would the food come from? With a massive shortage of food, farming will be more lucrative than the stock market. I know it's stretching it, but the reality isn't that far off. The reason that farmers are making so little right now is because they are flooding the market with the help of the subsidies.

The problem is the administration of the farm program.  Under better administration the farm program could shape agriculture in a direction that promotes farming in a more responsible manner.

Don't blame the tool.

I think it is mistake to rely on the technology of the past.  Times change.  Technology should not be frozen.  Small farmers do use modern technology.  They are adapt technology faster than do the big pig barns and feed lots.

I think the real issue that is of concern to you is religion and belief in God and the power of prayer.  Prayer and spritual belief is an important part of the human experience.  While Pat Robertson may speak to some he certainly does not speak to all people who hold a spritual connection.  Yes, I understand that there is power in numbers when it comes to sprituality, for ultimately sprituality is related to how we treat one another and the respect we hold for others and ourselves.  It is hard to respect ourselves and not respect others.

"At what level..?"

At a really small local level, as well as a 1000 acre level, with robotically assisted agriculture.

Powered by renewable energy using organic farming methods.

The worst alternative is the western New Mexico feedlot dairy environmental destruction.  Instead of farmers illegal workers slaving away to slash costs and devestate groundwater with chemical agriculture.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

Whether Biodiv has committed a grave e-sin by bringing up this off-topic, "power of prayer" business, far be it from me to judge.  All the same, I am glad he did.  It is always well done, to expose the hateful, mischievous mind of Pat Robertson, by quoting his own words, words that no true orthodox Christian could ever recognize as being uttered by a truly Christian mouth.

Can the decades-old tragedy of Lebanon be assigned to religion gone wrong?  And does the biblical tradition, including not only Judaism and Christianity but also Islam -- yeah, the same tradition in spades! -- , deserve all the blame?  Oh, gosh, that sounds at least like a reasonable hypothesis.  But surely we go too far, and are acting just as Talibanish as those whose deeds and words we deplore, if we advance from condemning Hizbullah's rocket attacks, and the Israelis' disproportionate response, to a general condemnation of all that can be called religion.

The ever-self-effacing Jon Meacham wrote a moving cover story for Newsweek (August 14) (eve of the Feast of the Assumption -- which ought to be declared Environmentalism Day -- ask me why!), on the great old Protestant preacher Billy Graham, in retirement.  Jon clearly loved doing this story.  Jerry Falwell is quoted proudly declaring that his "mission," unlike Graham's, is to "confront the culture"; Graham's son and heir Franklin said, "I think the last election was a moral one -- people of all faiths, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, felt that the gay agenda that the Democratic Party had essentially adopted and supported was scary.  It scared a lot of people of all faiths."  But Billy for his part, who in the past was usually sweet and eirenic, is lately especially mellow, and otherworldly, refusing to demonize, or to pronounce condemnations.  He even seems to be retreating on the literal inerrancy of the Bible, which to us Catholics into biblical scholarship counts as a major advance.

Back to the farm:  Apologies to Tom Philpott, if he is put out at all by my continuing the digression.  I always read and enjoy what Tom writes, in fact, and missed him when he was (presumably) away during his busy season.

To FFletcher: We have very different perspectives on the world, and so naturally do not always see eye-to-eye.  But you should know I very much like your "technology can be a good thing" message, above, even if the "power in numbers" part seems utterly un-Protestant and indeed un-Christian.  The part that Biodiv disparagingly quoted, on the other hand, is pretty close to the deepest wisdom of the Hebrew Prophets.  If he wants to dismiss you for reasoning "fuzzily," let him go; of course he would be the fuzzy one, for apparently assuming he can toss out all religion in one convenient throw-away container.

Finally, though, I come around to Biodiv's opening words: "Complicated business this."  As the husband of a farmer's son from Imperial Valley, CA, with sympathies for corn farmers in Oaxaca and cotton farmers in Mali, etc., and with mistrust for ADM and all the big-corn-related industries that Michael Pollan warns us about, I thus far agree entirely with Biodiv.

Caniscandida your writing is often enlighting, thank you for your words.  I unfortunately am better with my non-verbal mathmatical intuition than in my verbal pursuits, espeically during the week.

I must say to what I was referring when I used the "power in numbers."  When I was a child I learn that wherever two or more are joined my name there I shall be with you.  I was not sure what that meant until I got older and I began to make some sense of it.

When we discover the strength of sprituality in our ownselves we come to understand a bit of what we are in universe and for that matter something of what is the universe.  However, that is a very big thing for us to understand, probably too big.  By exploring our spritual side with others in a respectful manner we grow in a manner than has balance and greater understanding of the world and its people.  If we grow our spritual understanding within ourselves and by ourselves nothing new is introduced, only the old is re-hashed.  It can be a receipe for insanity, certainly imbalance.

I find that too many give TV religious people too much attention.  I find these leaders so full of themselves.  I grew up in a small farming ranching community, those TV personalities were not a source of spritual leadership with anyone I know there.  I think that often it is those who are alone in their search for God who find something in the likes of Rev. Robertson.  He can grasp on to that thread of reasoning that can get all twisted around inside a mind and seem to be truth.

Sanity is best found amoung the people and with the people and so is God.

When I orginally wrote the piece above I attempted to contrast with the risk management tactics of the poor as to those of the corporation.  It is funny how my Mom would approach potential risks with a prayer, while I find myself appling hedges, straddles,  forward contracts, puts and calls, as well as taking phyiscal deliveries.  It is the irony of it all, for I think Mom got a different, more peaceful form of satisfaction from her risk management than do I.

With regards to subsidies, I believe they are an important tool for Government, but they must be applied with a appropriate vision.  I believe this has been a problem for over 40 years.  It is time for a change.

    It is interesting how many of Gristmill's Bloggers regularly attack "left wingers".  Not sure if this is a trend, or what?? (smile).

    Tom raises some interesting points about who gets subsidies and who doesn't (one of my relatives who hasn't farmed in over 30 years gets around $2000 a year for not growing something or another, he actually rents out his land).  

    It may be true that in the developed world, local farming can be profitable, but for the developing world, it is the ability to sell excess produce to those who have more money (people in the developed world) that allows the poor to attract the capital needed to lift them out of poverty.

    All too often, those who favor local farmers here have no suggestions for how folks in poor nations might end their poverty.  

    What does ending poverty have to do with the environment?  Well, if you want to protect species or rainforests, you need to give people who live near and around them other ways to earn a living than exploiting them.

    Poor farmers who have access to richer markets may be able to afford the investment needed to practise sustainable farming methods.  Oh, and feed their families (if that matters).

    Perhaps it is only we left wing atheists who care about the poor nations (smile).  

    The idea that small farmers (or organic farmers) treat their workers well is a myth.  Some do, many do not.

    Another myth is any idea that anything in the existing agricultural system is protecting small "family" farms.  It is not, they continue to vanish in great numbers.

    If Americans can't be convinced to do anything about global warming (which is a looming disaster), how are you gonna get them to give up eating strawberries in January?  Or eating only locally grown beef?  (That would probably mean, based on a system of sharing, that New Yorkers would get beef about once every three months, and it would cost $100.00 a pound.)

    It is nice that so many of you have found a sense of spirituality that makes you happy.  Bravo.  I am distressed however to read statements like "When we discover the strength of sprituality in our ownselves we come to understand a bit of what we are in universe and for that matter something of what is the universe." or "Prayer and spritual belief is an important part of the human experience.".

    These may be an important part of SOME people's human experience, but not all of us.  Some of us feel that we have a place in the universe and a morality without gods.  It feels dangerous to hear sweeping statements about the importance of religion, because they suggest a lack of importance for those of us who are not religious.

    I feel that Tom's post mixes too many different issues (local farming, industrial farming, small farming, subsidies and an attack on helping poor farmers in developing countries) to be really clear.  But I eagerly await his agenda which hopefully will include suggestions on how poor farmers might be helped.

    And it would not hurt if it mentioned farm workers in America (who still live in conditions not much better than their third world counterparts). (a plug) (smile)

Patrick

Dear FFletcher,

no need to go on at length, but I just want you to know I have read this last beautiful message of yours many times.

As much as I like the "When we discover" paragraph, I find myself even more moved by the "When I originally wrote" paragraph.

How blessed you are, to have had a mother like that!

Patricciuccio bambino, so lovely to have you back!

Good for you, for standing up as the voice of ethical atheism!  Please do not be distressed, though, by FFletcher's comments, which I doubt FF means to comprehend either humanity-at-its-best, or humanity-naturally-and-universally.

But by all means, let us await FF's own response.

Meanwhile, if you simply must have that shark-fin soup, do not have anything stronger afterwards than the Egg Fu-Yung.

Anyway, never by any means ask yourself, What Would Jesus Order?

So far as that goes, though, my feeling is that, for dessert, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity would not like the kumquats, but would much prefer the orange sherbet.  With fortune cookie, of course.

While raised a catholic I have stopped going to church 35 years ago.  I think formal religion is fine for kids, but when you get to be an adult it is time to think and act like an adult, and an important part of that is to come to terms with how you intend to live your life and what you believe in.  More importantly, how to live and continue to grow.  I don't support any formal religions, but I try to understand them.  There is a little truth in them all, and what do you call something with a little truth...a lie.  Still there is something to learn.  For many the formal religion is enough.  But for some, there is more out there.

It becomes a process of indivual development.  We start out as children, we go through certain predictable development phases and then we become adult.  We can still continue to grow, to shake off the old and take on new.  Psychology, philosophy, and experimentation help us grow.  Rollo May, the psychologist, wrote several book that I found especially enlighting.  His Courage to Create is one I read and re-read from time to time.  It is funny how often I come upon people who grew up with him, stayed with him, and otherwise knew him.  Another similar writer that I find crossing paths with is Ken Wilbur.  I have never met him, but we have a number of common friends.  He too was a friend of Rollo May.  Ken Wilbur is very interesting, check out his Integral Institute for more informatin.

I think we are more connected that we might commonly understand.

Dear Caniscandida,

     I passed through your neck of the woods (JFK airport) on my journeys, but from your postings, you were travelling as well (smile).  Thanks for your kind words (and it is good to "see" you again as well), but don't forget, it is ethical vegetarian atheism, so no shark fin soup for me!  The tofu version is better (smile).

And for you and FFletcher, I grew up with religion as well (though not Catholic), but shed it very early on (early adolesence) and haven't missed it since.

I am not opposed to religion, but prefer it stick to the spiritual concerns of its members and stay away from politics and from society as a whole.  The continuing assaults on science by large portions of the American religious establishment (as well as on the rights of those they don't like, such as women, gays and environmentalists) deeply concern me.

It is an interesting world, in any case.

patrick