Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Market Distortions and Hidden Costs of the Farm Bill’s Agriculture Subsidies: A Policy Investigation

by January 10, 2024
January 10, 2024
Market Distortions and Hidden Costs of the Farm Bill’s Agriculture Subsidies: A Policy Investigation

Paul Best

As Congress gears up for debate over the next Farm Bill later this year, many of the subsidy programs meant to aid the agriculture industry are under fire from some of the very farmers they are designed to support.

In a new policy investigation, Farm Bill Sows Dysfunction for American Agriculture, several farmers across the United States sounded off about how crop insurance subsidies and other aid programs disproportionately benefit wealthier farmers, incentivize environmentally harmful practices, distort planting decisions in ways that ultimately impact our food supply, and discourage innovation amid everchanging weather and market conditions.

Agriculture subsidies have taken various forms since the first New Deal‐​era Farm Bill was authorized by Congress, ranging from paying farmers to destroy their crops to lower supply in the 1930s, to transferring direct subsidies to farmers in the early 2000s.

Subsidized crop insurance is the most expensive program under the current iteration of the Farm Bill, with a total cost of over $17 billion.

The government subsidizes about 60 percent of the premiums for policies that farmers buy from private insurance companies, amounting to a record $11.6 billion in 2022. The government also pays those private insurance companies about $2 billion per year to cover their administrative costs.

While the rising cost of subsidized crop insurance may be a concern for taxpayers and the lawmakers who represent them, the many distortionary effects of the program are at the top of farmers’ minds.

“I don’t miss walking into those [government] offices and doing the paperwork and they know every single thing about my operation,” said one of those farmers, Gabe Brown, who attributes the success of his 5,000-acre North Dakota ranch to shifting his focus to regenerative agriculture and quitting all subsidy programs.

“And they say, ‘Oh, but it takes away your safety net.’ My safety net is the resiliency built into my soil,” said Brown. “My safety net is the health of the operation. My safety net is the fact that I don’t rely on only one or two commodities to make my income. We have 17 different enterprises on our ranch now. So I’m resilient—our ranch is resilient—because of the diversity and because of the health of the ecosystem. That’s very liberating. It’s a good feeling.”

Read the full policy investigation here, along with a visual feature here.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Accountants urge Brits to fight taxman as penalties spike to new record
next post
Escape the Chaos: Discovering the Key to Tackling Market Uncertainty

You may also like

Biden’s SAVE versus Current Income-Driven Repayment: Grad School...

August 22, 2023

Friday Feature: Spyrja Academy

March 14, 2025

The Pros and Cons of Decriminalization

September 29, 2023

North Carolina Passenger Rail Project May Cost $70...

December 15, 2023

Can Putin Survive a Settlement of the War...

September 22, 2023

Paul Krugman and the “Ersatz” Theory of Private...

July 29, 2022

How Common Has Private Currency Been?

August 16, 2022

How Maduro Clings to Power

September 27, 2024

Friday Feature: Riverside Club for Adventure & Imagination

November 10, 2023

Corporate Welfare Breeds Corruption

August 12, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Friday Feature: Savannah Legacy Academy

      June 27, 2025
    • The Supreme Court Is Right on Reading Opt-Outs, But That’s Not Enough

      June 27, 2025
    • Barrett eviscerates Jackson, Sotomayor takes on a ‘complicit’ court in contentious final opinions

      June 27, 2025
    • Trump would strike Iran ‘without question’ if it restarts nuclear weapons program

      June 27, 2025
    • Florida man indicted for ’86’ posts allegedly threatening to kill Alina Habba

      June 27, 2025
    • Top House Republicans send stern warning to Senate GOP as Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ risks delay

      June 27, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,329)
    • Investing (2,079)
    • Politics (15,835)
    • Stocks (3,174)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved