Exposing the Dangers of Federal Agricultural Subsidies: A Battle for Market Fairness

The agricultural industry, like many others, has evolved through distinct stages from its inception to maturity. However, federal agricultural subsidies in the United States have disrupted this natural progress, favoring large corporations at the expense of smaller, less competitive entities. This article explores the potential issues with these subsidies and their impact on market fairness.

The Natural Evolution of Industries

From the dawn of the industrial age, industries have followed a predictable trajectory. At the start, numerous companies vie for success, and as the industry matures, consolidation occurs, leaving a few dominant players. Similar patterns have been observed in industries such as automobiles, steel, mining, and software.

Agricultural Industry: An Unexpected Detour

The agricultural industry should have adhered to this natural progression. However, federal agricultural subsidies have allowed weak and inefficient farms to survive, disrupting the market dynamics. American consumers bear the brunt of this through higher costs due to price supports and subsidies.

Subsidies and Inefficiency

Proponents of agricultural subsidies argue that they help family farmers survive. However, this claim is often misleading. Over 90% of price supports and subsidies flow to large, multi-billion dollar corporations that use this money for stock buybacks and dividends. By continuing to support these subsidies, we fail to allow the market to naturally filter out the weaker players.

Trade Agreements and Market Access

Subsidies also play a role in trade agreements, where the U.S. government bargains away domestic market access for other economic or political reasons. A notable example is the trade agreement with Colombia, where the U.S. offered market access for fresh cut flowers in exchange for helping control drug crops. This resulted in increased exports of both flowers and illegal drugs. Such deals compromise the integrity of our domestic markets.

Debunking the Myth of Exorbitant Farm Product Prices

It is a complex issue when people claim that American farm products are too expensive. Several factors contribute to this perception:

The high cost of land, which developers often outbid farmers for. Increased fuel and fertilizer costs, partly exacerbated by environmental and liberal policies. The impact of urban development on rural areas, leading to dwindling water resources. Resistance to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that could lower the need for pesticides and fertilizers.

Instead of relying on subsidies, farmers could thrive in any open market if given the chance. The argument that we don't need farmers because we have grocery stores is a misnomer. Farms play a crucial role in ensuring food security and supporting local economies.

Conclusion

Eliminating agricultural subsidies and price supports could lead to a more competitive and fair market, allowing smaller, more efficient farms to rise to the top. This approach would be in line with the natural progression of industries and would foster a stronger, more resilient agricultural sector. It is time to stop letting federal interventions distort the natural market forces that have historically shaped industries.