|
Saronville NE | I get the part of it'd help bring land rents down. It keep marginal ground from being in production of as much row crop etc.
But I guess I'm mystified by wanting your crop insurance to triple. Here in our area we get hit by wind and hail every single yr. We are irrigated can grow good crops but like this yr has proven when you don't get help from mother nature you can't grow good crops on 100% irrigation. Our insurance for 80% federal crop and P120 is $105 an acre. Sone of the crops this yr will only cover inputs no rent. Dryland at 5 bu beans and 25 bu corn doesn't even cover harvest expenses let alone any of your inputs and rent. I tried low cost approach like feed etc on few marginal acres to take expenses away but as dry as we were they didn't ton up enough to even cover rent.
So the bigger question is if you had a couple yrs of that with either no insurance or very light insurance because how much it costs will you still be operating? Money we handle anymore is not pocket change. I remember dad saying he would of pulled thru the 80s if had crop insurance. But growing zero crop then buying 100% of yr feed back to feed livestock all on high interest didn't work too well. Do that for couple yrs and see how long some would last? | |
|
Senator wants to cut crop insurance subsidies
