Anyone seen this or been following it? I'd post a link but that's above my skill set. I heard one rancher say that it is already happening in his area. The minority farmers or ranchers are getting their loans dismissed and are turning around and borrowing more $ to go buy more land or livestock. Some are saying that it might already be having an effect on some segments of the cattle markets despite profits bargains being extremely tight to nonexistent.

Same with restaurant owners, the Biden stimulus money is for minorities.

It got struck down, the racial part of it, by a unanimous SCOTUS ruling. But not before they had already doled out several billion.

Not just these two programs. Take a look at the the list of names for your local payroll program. I bet the names will skew heavily to one side.

Well I guess its time to become a minority.

If something can get struck down unanimously by the Supreme Court something is alot messed up. Goes to show you how screwed up the President and there agenda is. People better start taking heed of what's going on and start asking why. Bigger games maybe being played.

That might be part of the plan

Just 2 days ago it was in Federal court and judge said it was ok???

Democrats rewarding their voter base.

Yeah I'm not seeing where the SCOTUS has struck it down yet

Democrats keeping their voter base on the plantation..

Court struck it down as racist but they already dished the money out so it doesnt matter.

I really believe this will all backfire on Biden. Time will tell. The first 100 days were depressing. I think this post is not allowed but at 69 we will see if it slips through the cracks. Let’s go TB. You can’t beat hockey this time of year.

The food supply for this country and a large part of the world is in the hands of mostly conservative minded people and I have thought for several years that the people who are seeking control and power in this country will have to change that and somehow must establish some way to take more control over the food supply. This might be first steps of breaking the established ag sector to usher in stronger government control.

https://www.agriculture.com/news/bu...forgiveness-program-for-minority-farmers

Here is a little information. I have not read much on the court cases. I have read enough about the loan forgiveness programs to oppose it.

I farm. It is not my primary occupation but it is an important part of our overall finances and our farm is very important to our family. I did not inherit it. I bought my first tract 15 years ago and have been adding to it when I can. I bought all of the equipment and all of cows. I paid for all improvements. I tried one federal conservation program and said never again.

I don't fault who people take out federal loans, participate in government conservation programs and I can reconcile people taking subsidies although I don't like it. That reconciliation is somewhat inconsistent with my anti-welfare position--so if someone asks me to vote to end it all--I would.

This loan forgiveness program is straight up wrong. Call it what it is: raced based welfare, reparations and buying votes.

Interesting point. You might be right on the government control.

Probably trying to offset the billions that rich white farmers get every year in subsidies. Not a fan of either.

I hope they got it struck down a program like that is somthing the Chinese could really use against us . I keep expecting any day to hear Al Sharpton complaining that most of that money went to chinese and mexican farmers . I don't know if That's the case but it sure wouldnt surprise me . I bet the Chinese immigrants took full advantage of this program.

I would be OK with getting rid of all of it.

Great video. Long but the guy is very informed and knowledgeable on what he speaks. If you own land take the time to watch this video.

X3

Debt reduction, forgiveness and other programs have been a part of the agriculture culture for decades. Minorities are the latest and more targeted in their scope. Subsidies have been a part of farm production for over 70 years in some form or another with many of the crops benefiting the most being from the south as the Democrats held power in the senate from the south until the 1980s as there was no GOP really in the south prior to that time and their tenure gave them control of most or heads of most committees. Yes it sounds great to eliminate the farm subsidies and over time that may well be the outcome. The real short term impact would be huge losses of wealth and assets in the major commodity crop producing regions. This would lower land prices, building value, machinery and the communities that benefit from the higher values. It would not take to much of lowering of values for a few very wealthy, companies, individuals or countries to buy up a lot of production resources. These buyers most likely would easily out bid the hundreds of thousands of lower equity individuals who would like to be bidding on those assets. The central plains, midwest and southeast rural areas would be hurt the most as they have the most acreages of commodity producing land and the crops that receive subsidies.

Bryce

Here's what the Soviets did:

• arrest all the farmers and send them to gulags.
• install government managers to run the farms.
• transport all the food to the cities and starve the conservative, independent-minded rural communities until they were gone.

I guess we'll all get to see how long a nation, the most indebted in world history, can continue to borrow money from those who are not from America, and continue to give massive amounts of this indebtedness out as stimulus, reparations, loans, assistance, security, stipends, payments, retribution, installments, guidance, governance, incentives, welfare, equity, safety, prosperity, protection and about 1,000 other categories.

My money says that those who delight in the indebtedness of America are toasting their wine goblets often these days.
While Americans continue to claim we are free.

He who holds the yoke rope steers the ox my friends.
Every farmer knows that.

Blessings,
Mark

I wonder if very many minority have government loans? I have a second cousin that had about 600 thousand dollars worth of government loans that he had just got. He had bought some cattle and 200 acres or so. From what I hear every bit was forgiven, so guess he has all that for free now. He has a Indian card like me and is probably 3/64th maybe. But I was told he is debt free. He is a basketball coach. I know of only one black man to get his loans forgiven.

Working for farmers and even expanding my gardening a bit has brought me to the realization it doesn’t take much to ruin a crop however even rebels need to eat. The good news is the communists want all electric vehicles in the near future. This will put the food supply on trains which have no secrets about where they will be.

I had the same question on my mind too.

Bryce,

I fully understand that without subsidies there would be a direct negative effect to the rural economy, but are all these subsidies fair to the rest of the taxpayers in the United States. Government subsidies were designed to be safety nets, not an above average guaranteed income.

Is it fair that farmers are able to amass fortunes in land and equipment at taxpayers expense? These subsidies have artificially raised the price of land. There are government programs for just about ever facet of farming from grain crop insurance subsidies to livestock subsidies to set aside subsidies and more.

What I see in my area are farmers who have gotten hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers dollars the past years and have bought land, machinery, built nice houses, etc. I don’t begrudge anyone from having these things, I just don’t think my taxpayer dollars should have paid for them.

I do not know what the answer is to all this is as our representatives believe they need the “farmers vote” even though the farmers and ranchers are definitely in the minority of voters and if anyone says against the programs that person is chastised.

No one gets a subsidy because they are White, lets not be obtuse and pretend that is irrelevant.

I did not say they were fair or even that great of a system or method of how to ensure a food supply and to allow high enough revenues to continue to produce during low return times, but it is the system we have based on initial and new farm bills every 5 years since the end of WW11. One of the main reasons that food continues to be relatively low cost in the USA is that with subsidies the processors and marketers can buy food and feed below production costs and the difference plus or minus a high or low profit is made up by the government and not the market. High prices is the best way to keep the government subsidies low or not a factor. High prices also attract non ag wealth to the food industry. Most very wealthy companies don't invest in food or fiber as there is far too much expense in production, huge overhead fixed costs and very variable prices.


Bryce

What percentage of the cost of a loaf of bread is the actual cost of the wheat that is in it? Last I looked I believe it was 6 to 8 percent. Wheat could double and bread would go up.less than 10%.

It’s either subsidize to keep food affordable or subsidize the buyers so they can pay the true cost to produce it.

I believe most farmers use the money more wisely than the current crop of food stampers. That could change with the increased number of participants that would need the program to eat.

If the wheat jumped out of the field and into the bread it would be very cheap, but it doesn’t.

We either keep moving to more of a socialist system or start moving away from it......

There is plenty of food left in the field to be gleaned but it is easier for someone else to hand out a check.

Hobbie do u not get it the the cost of most commodities play a small part in the cost of food???
So the argument for government subsidies to cheap food cheap kind of goes out the window doesn't it?

What? lol

Grain prices could triple and farmers to take the margin of profit out of it by paying more for land either in rent or actual purchase.

Way over your head isn't it.lol

Just for the record I have been involved in agriculture my entire life and make my living in it

I don't see why many posters here don't understand that commodities are the base and all the other costs are added value costs to get to retail. Most of us sell fur and wonder how $40 worth of rats cost $160 in a hat, or sell good hard wood and compare that to the table in the furniture store. If every handler needs a profit then prices get adjusted every time there is a spike. Over time we see finished costs ratchet up and never really fall back down to where current base prices are at. Profit margins in commodity production are percentage wise typically very, very low that is why many strive to expand so they can have more revenues to expand more.

Bryce

I’m pretty sure paying the fuel bill to get it in the ground and to the processing facilities keeps them planting. This ain’t fur trapping we are discussing. They don’t do it to lose money.

Exactly!!!!!

The libs are trying to muddy the subject here.

Not really. I know some farmers that aren’t going to plant this years, not surprising that none of them are on the subsidy list.

Rich white farmers. Hmmm I don’t know any.

To simplify my point, the price the farmer is getting for his commodity plays such a small percentage of the end cost of food (as was pointed out by bblwi) that the argument the the government must support agriculture to keep prices low is voided in my opinion. The tax payer is better off paying the increased price of food (as it would be slight) than the terribly ineffective and corrupt government subsidizing agriculture. And in the long run the farmers would be better off also

I do

So not planting has no bearing on the cost of food?

Most farmers I know are rich, asset rich and cash poor, still rich by most measures.

HobbieTrapper
If they aren't taking government subsidies then what's wrong with doing away with them?

I suppose nothing unless you are eating from their acreage.

Lol ur looking at this with such a narrow view that this IS over ur head

What do subsidies have to do with this????
This is in addition too.

One sentence u say they aren't taking it and the next u say we can't do without it. As a friend take my advice and stop before it gets worse

What the (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) are you talking about?

You stated some farmers aren't taking or aren't on subsidy list, my point is if they aren't taking government subsidies that maybe ts possible to find away to move agriculture away from them all together. But you state that isn't possible.

I thought this topic was a color issue.
Are white farmers receiving loan forgiveness?

I think not but I haven't seen anywhere that the courts have stopped this program.

Progression of a conversation

Many have stated that all subsidies should be dropped for farmers and other agriculture ventures. That may be the best long term but we also need to then decided if we should remove all the subsidies and credits for all individuals and businesses, like the 22% depletion allowance for oil, federal support for local roads, bridges, etc. mortgage interest for home owners but not commercial loans. This allows landlords to borrow cheap money and deduct the interest and while renting, they can keep their funds in higher return investments. EIC credits, child tax credits, vouchers to send students to private schools, and the list could go on and on. These have been around or added to by almost every congress and administration for two generations and the ag subsidies during the last administration were some of the largest ever and in addition to the ones already being utilized. The one thing ag subsidies do is they create tremendous economic turnover as producing products consumes lots of resources and vast majority of those expenses are spent here. If we would have subsidized or paid more attention to processing then production we may not have 80% of our meat processing controlled by 4 companies, two of which have strong foreign influence.

Bryce

Minority farmers loan forgiveness USDA

That is pure racial discrimination.

You're right. Of course I didn't say they get it for being white. But since minorities make up a very small percentage of farmers, we can assume can't we?

Minorities don't get subsidies the same as whites?

What I have seen as a small farmer is that there isn't much support from the government for me or my size of farmer. But except for trapping that is how I make my living. Which is fine with me. But I always scratch my head at seeing guys that have farm income in the millions taking subsidies. So they get just a little bit richer....thank you taxpayers. Did they really need it to stay afloat?

We're just being pedantic now. My point was this bill discriminates based on race whereas other subsidies do not, pointing out White Farmers receive most of those subsides suggest they do.

Below is a link that reviews some ag subsidy numbers.

https://usafacts.org/articles/federal-farm-subsidies-what-data-says/

In 2019 69% of the a bit over 2 million farms did not apply for or get subsidies. The 31% of farms receive the greatest share of subsidies.
Also in 2019 14 billion or more of the subsidy payments came directly through the administration and Congress never had any input in the huge increase in payments.

Bryce

It could be that minority farmers have smaller farms (like me) and don't get to dip their beak like the bigger farmers do. But of course in a strict sense you're correct. Maybe they should just say smaller farms get the extra help.

Majority of the farm bill is nutrition. As I have said before. I wish the FSA would magically disappear so i wouldn’t have to read stuff like this!

Found this from Sept. 3, 2020 from taxpayer.net.

USDA – Farm Subsidies at Highest Level in 20 Years
Official estimate is actually an undercount
Agriculture | Quick Take
Sep 3, 2020 | 3 min read | Print Article
This week the USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) released an updated Farm Income Forecast. In it the USDA projects total net farm income will exceed $102 billion, a nearly 23 percent increase from last year. This significant boost in profitability for farming and ranching businesses is due almost entirely to a massive increase in federal subsidies. Direct government payments in 2020 are forecast to be $37.2 billion, constituting 36.2 percent of net farm income, the highest level since 2001.

While this level of federal farm subsidies is the highest in a generation, it’s actually an under count of the amount of aid that is coming. The ERS does not include the $14 billion in Commodity Credit Corporation spending authority provided by the CARES Act. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue has recently stated that these funds will be used for an additional round of COVID aid to farmers and ranchers. Including the $14 billion, direct government payments would be $51.2 billion for 2020. That would make government payments 43.8 percent of net farm income, the highest since 2000.

And $51.2 billion may even be an undercount. Congress is still debating another coronavirus aid package and agriculture special interests are seeking billions in additional subsidies. The HEROES Act that passed the House in May would provide $16.5 billion in “emergency” funding for the USDA to provide direct payments to farmers and ranchers. The HEALS Act introduced in the Senate would provide $20 billion in direct payments.

Besides the amount of COVID-19 related subsidies, ERS may be underestimating the amount of “ad hoc” subsidies Congress will ultimately authorize. The recent derecho, drought, and hurricanes are also fodder for more aid. After going nearly a decade without doing so, Congress has passed ad-hoc disaster supplementals for agricultural businesses three years in a row, covering the last four crop years. Despite there being numerous federal disaster programs and the $8.5 billion a year federal crop insurance program for just these kinds of “disasters,” special interests in Congress are pushing for yet another “emergency” package.

The enormous amount of dollars going to farmers and ranchers is a cause for concern. While segments of the agriculture sector are clearly suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic, some agricultural special interests and lawmakers are advocating for an unprecedented expansion of Washington’s role in the farm economy. A majority of the aid so far has gone to very large farms while shutting out many diversified and small and medium-sized farms. And as multiple years of “emergency” aid layered on top of trade war bailouts layered on top of crop insurance and farm bill subsidies show, turning off the ag subsidy spigot is very difficult.

"This significant boost i profitability for farming and ranching businesses is due almost entirely to a massive increase in federal subsidies."
Guess that explains all the new pickups and massive shiny equipment I see everywhere.

People still run old farm equipment in my part of Virginia. Sometimes the old stuff is easier to fix.

They sure don't here! It's got to be new and big.

Minority farmers loan forgiveness is a BOON Doogle for appropriations for minorities. Another minority perk. SCREW THAT "White Farmer"!