Death comes to us all. Life's but a walking shadow | Given the fact that we probably have too many acres of corn & soybeans to support a decent price and need to reduce those acres my question is: How many producers plant more acres of corn & soybeans because they receive payments than they would if they didn't have the extra money?
When I hear of these payments like $60-$100 per acre per year that seems like a significant percentage of annual gross revenue. Yet given the fact that roughly 50% of the worked land in the central corn belt is rented doesn't this mean that this anticipated payment just get passed through as higher land rents and become effectively a landlord subsidy? And worst yet it causes all land rents to rise so even those producers who don't qualify get penalized by higher land rents as well.
And if you assume that these kinds of direct payment subsidies require some real political support where does this political support come from? Most of the comments above indicate that the producers themselves don't support them. Somebody has to be behind this?
For full disclosure, I receive very little payment because only about 10% of my acres has base. In fact only about 20% of farmland in this state has base.
Maybe somebody can explain the politics of this. |
sequestered farm payments?
