Twin Tiers Living 558 Posted March 6 Quote OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Farmers and meat producers across the U.S. can expect the new tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China and the retaliatory action from those countries to hurt their bottom lines by billions of dollars if they stay in place a while, and consumers could quickly see higher prices for produce and ground beef. But some of the impact on farmers might not be felt until the next harvest and some products might actually get cheaper in the short run for consumers if exports suffer. And the price of corn, wheat and soybeans accounts for relatively little of the price of most products. Plus, President Donald Trump could offer farmers significant aid payments, as he did during the trade war with China during his first administration, to offset some of the losses. In his address to Congress Tuesday night, Trump argued that agricultural imports hurt American farmers and asked them to “bear with me again” as he seeks to protect them. He didn’t mention any additional aid. “I love the farmer,” he said. Source Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beekeeper 91 Posted March 8 When I first started teaching, I was in rural Missouri. This was1983 and the farmer aid was a budget cut. I saw many a farmer lose their farm to bigger corporations. The family farm hasn't been around in a big way since then...It is corporations. My daughter lives in NE and my husband hates to fly. It is amazing to me how much corn we as a country grow. In theory, if we got rid of the pay to not farm,,which we have done since ?, I do wonder if some of that land would be sold to developers and become houses. I grew up on McRoberts Rd in Pittsburgh. It was called that because it used to be McRoberts farm where it was built. Maybe we should let some of that farm land become houses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris 3,628 Posted March 8 19 minutes ago, Beekeeper said: Maybe we should let some of that farm land become houses. The problem with that is, once that farmland is gone, it’s gone. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beekeeper 91 Posted March 8 True. But if we are growing more than we need, maybe it's okay that some of it is gone. That used to be the way things worked. Cities expanded, farms were bought out and turned into suburbs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ann 510 Posted March 10 On 3/8/2025 at 1:23 PM, Beekeeper said: But if we are growing more than we need, maybe it's okay that some of it is gone If we are growing more than what we need I can’t help but wonder why so many have food insecurity and prices ate so high. How much is shipped over seas? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beekeeper 91 Posted March 10 I don't know how much is sent overseas. I do know that many farmers in the MidWest are paid yearly not to grow to keep the supply at the right place to meet demand so the prices don't fall below what it cost to grow. Fertilizer is expensive. Getting water to the crops with the crazy weather is expensive. Cost of diesel has gone up, so getting the crops to where they need to go is expensive. Most farmers borrow money to buy seeds. If they don't sell at a high enough price to break even, they are in trouble, Wish I knew more about the economics of that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MsKreed 1,690 Posted March 10 Statistics on the USDA website (Here) track agricultural exports/imports by "bulk" commodities and "high-value" products. They're defined as: Quote The US exports significantly more "bulk" commodities than it imports......while exports for high-value products are moderately less than imports of teh same classification. The breakdown is..... I don't know for sure how making changes to subsidies might affect the sustainability of farms. But I do recall that as far back as 1961 a local farmer felt the subsidies he received were an unnecessary waste of tax dollars. That premise is what led to William T. "Cadillac" Smith of Big Flats spending 26 years representing us in the NYS Senate. Quote He got the nickname “Cadillac” after a stunt he pulled in 1961 to protest the government’s farm subsidy program. He took money sent to him by the government for not growing corn, bought a shiny Cadillac, put a sign on the back thanking President John F. Kennedy for his generosity, and drove it to Washington, D.C., where he was greeted by Republican congressmen. The stunt was featured in Time magazine in 1961. Source: Ex-senator ‘Cadillac’ Smith dies 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites