Someone Tell Me Again Why We Have Farm Subsidies
As an attempt in the House to cap farm subsidies goes down in flames we get news that the economics of farming have changed quite a bit since the justifications for farm subsidies were first laid out during the depression era.
The Agriculture Department forecasts that the average farm household will earn more than $89,000 in 2008, up 6.3% from 2007. That’s a third higher than the average U.S. household income, which is projected to be $67,000.
Despite that, farm-bill negotiators are fighting to keep $5.2 billion in direct payments, which go to farmers regardless of how much they earn or whether they are growing a crop.
Stephen Spruiell has more:
Let’s look closer at that average farm household income statistic. Ninety-two percent of farm-dwellers derive either all or most of their income from sources other than farming or subsidies. Average household incomes for this group have increased steadily since 2006. These farmers are expected to earn between $63,500 and $83,500 this year.
The other 8 percent — commercial farmers who derive most of their income from farming and subsidies — earned an average of $200,000 last year — an increase of 22 percent from 2006. This year, income for this group is projected to hit $230,000 — another 9.3-percent increase. The USDA, which calculated these estimates, reported last year that the windfall for commercial farmers is due in large part to “demand from the rapid expansion of ethanol production.”
According to the Environmental Working Group’s Farm Subsidy Database, the top 8 percent of farm-subsidy recipients received 57 percent of the payments in 2006, for an average payment of $65,613. (The top 20 percent of recipients get 80 percent of the payments.)
Given all this, to the taxpayers really need to be on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars every year in ag subsidies?












