Some people think the "farm subsidy
program" is the goose that lays golden eggs for farmers.
I certainly won't dispute that Congress knows how to lay an egg, and sometimes
they are golden, but the gold is not going into the pocket of the farmers.
The government says the money goes to "the farm" as that is listed
in their data base. However, a 5,000-member cooperative can be listed as a
single recipient in that data base. USDA says they are fixing that.
The first line of a recent Associated Press news story said, "Federal
subsidies for farmers in Minnesota jumped 35 percent last year to nearly $1
billion..."
Does that sound like Minnesota farmers pocketed a billion dollars from the
government? Sure it does, but the farmers really don't get to keep that money.
They are just a conduit.
Most of that money ends up in someone else's pocket when the farmer buys
livestock, seed, fertilizer, pesticides, fuel, machinery, repairs, rentals and
labor.
In South Dakota about 85-87 cents out of every dollar received by farmers
(including government subsidies) goes for operating costs.
So, of all the subsidy money said to be "for farmers", the farmers
might get to keep 15%. One might just as well say this is a subsidy "for
the local REA", or "for the bankers", or "for the oil
companies", or "for the equipment manufactures" as to say
"for the farmers".
The $4 billion South Dakota farmers spend annually on production goes for
this: $336 million on feed, $337 million on livestock, $289 million for seed,
$240 million for fertilizer and lime, $199 million on pesticides, $168 million
on fuel, $100 million on electricity, $269 million on repairs, $294 million in
interest, $124 million for labor, $363 million to landlords, $222 million in
property taxes, $430 for capitol investments and the rest for miscellaneous
costs.
If this subsidy were called a "rural America subsidy", that would be
far more accurate than calling it a "farm subsidy" or "subsidy
for farmers".
As it is now, the press just keeps saying these farmers are getting all this
money and a few people at the top are getting most of the money. Those things
are simply not true. The farmers whose names are being published on the
internet get only a small portion of that money, and the biggest "farmer
recipient" is in some states a cooperative with thousands of members.
The support industries, equipment dealers, fuel distributors and the local
county commissioners who impose property taxes do not have their names posted
in the "farm subsidy" database. The farmer getting 15% takes the
political heat for all of them.
I have written on government subsidies before. I am not a big fan of
government subsidies, but let’s be fair about it.
