Most of Trump’s U.S. farm aid goes to wealthiest farmers

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Most of Trump’s U.S. farm aid goes to wealthiest farmers

Aug 14, 2019 | 10:31 1 https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/news-opinion/news/most-of-trumps-u-s-farm-aid-goes-to-wealthiest-farmers/?module=under-carousel&pgtype=homepage&i=

Most of Trump’s U.S. farm aid goes to wealthiest farmers
The top one per cent of aid recipients received an average of more than $180,000

By Humeyra Pamuk
Published: August 13, 2019
News
According to a recent study, the biggest and most successful farmers benefitted the most from President Trump's support package to help counter the financial pain felt by the U.S./China trade war.

Reuters – More than half of the Trump administration’s $8.4 billion in trade aid payments to U.S. farmers through April was received by the top 10 per cent of recipients, the country’s biggest and most successful farmers, a study by an advocacy group shows.

Highlighting an uneven distribution of the bailout, which was designed to help offset effects of the U.S.-China trade war, the Environmental Working Group said the top one per cent of aid recipients received an average of more than $180,000 while the bottom 80 per cent were paid less than $5,000 in aid.

The EWG, a Washington-based non-profit, said it obtained data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture through Freedom of Information Act requests for its research, the results of which could not be independently verified by Reuters.

The Trump administration last year began rolling out federal aid for farmers to compensate for lower farm good prices and lost sales after Washington’s trade dispute with China wiped out a key export market for U.S. agricultural goods.

The first round of aid, announced in 2018, was up to $12 billion. The second round, unveiled last month, involves up to $16 billion and $14.5 billion of that is direct payments.

U.S. farmers, a key constituency of President Donald Trump, have been among the hardest hit in the year-long trade war between the world’s two largest economies. Shipments of soybeans, the most valuable U.S. farm export, to top buyer China sank to a 16-year low in 2018.

“Farm bailout payments designed to offset the impacts of President Trump’s trade war have overwhelmingly flowed to the largest and most successful farmers,” EWG said in a statement.

It said the first round of payments had been linked to crop production, favouring the biggest producers of certain crops. The second round, rolled out last week, would further favour big farms because it was designed to pay per acre, EWG said.

“The bigger the farm, the bigger the government cheque,” it said. A USDA spokeswoman said aid payments were made based on a producer’s individual production. “The more acres they farm and bushels per acre they produce — the more assistance they receive,” she said in emailed comments.

The new round also increased the maximum amount of aid per individual or legal entity to $500,000 from $125,000 in the package last year.
Social9
0 Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2019 | 10:39 2 What's the point?????


...Canadian farmers are getting nothing....

It's good for the economy ....direct payments go into the economy....


And keep farms going forward...

If you don't agree...send the money back and then tell all the middleman industries to send theirs back as well...

Shortline railways received 12.5 million...

Morris industries received 1.5 million....


The protein guys are chewing on a billion dollar fund...

150 million to graincos for export insurance so they can redirect their product through the UAE....

None are helping farmers Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • LEP
    Aug 14, 2019 | 10:41 3 Hello Captain Obvious. What did you think a payment based on acres or bushels would result in?

    Those that farm the most acres or produce the most bushels get paid the most. Reply With Quote

  • Aug 14, 2019 | 12:27 4 he has extreme difficulty with the very simplest of matters Reply With Quote
    SASKFARMER's Avatar Aug 14, 2019 | 12:45 5 Dah chuck you just don’t get it. Making every one equal was the CWB way. We were all broke. This is a acreage payment in the USA not canada so if you farm 10000 acres you get a set amount. Similar if you farm 100 acres you don’t get what the 10000 acre farmer gets.

    Wow those cwb days really mild the mind Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • blackpowder's Avatar Aug 14, 2019 | 12:50 6 Anything that confirms the bias in relational thinking. Reply With Quote
    Aug 14, 2019 | 14:24 7 100% of sockboys MFP payment goes to dairy. Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 07:21 8 "the top one per cent of aid recipients received an average of more than $180,000 while the bottom 80 per cent were paid less than $5,000 in aid."

    80 percent of farms got only $5000 or less out of the April payment. If $5000 makes much of a difference on your farm then you are in trouble already.

    The solution is not to have Trump borrow more money and pay farmers compensation from taxpayers.

    The solution is to stop making the trade war with China worse.

    Trump rolled back the idea of higher tariffs in September on Chinese electronics and consumer items citing the impact on prices for Christmas shopping! LOL

    But didn't Donald say China pays the tariffs! LOL

    As the global economy heads into recession and commodity prices and stock markets fall even farther you can thank Donald for his erratic and illogical behavior and for making America great again at everyone else's expense! Reply With Quote
    SASKFARMER's Avatar Aug 15, 2019 | 07:36 9 Hey, CWB Chuck, the Guys that grow a few acres of Soy aren't hurt as bad as the guys with thousands of acres. Wake up the CWB didn't work, and your theory doesn't make any sense.

    Or like the NDP one putz is the same as the other. Were all equal solidarity forever. But the top dogs still get fed. Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 07:41 10 Chuck

    I didn't vote for trump....did you....

    Maybe it's time for Trudeau to take his panties (BTW I hate that word...to me its worse than f***)
    off and put some big boy pants on.... Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 07:41 11 The average farm size in the USA is 444 acres so it’s not hard to believe the the 30,000 acre guys got a big check.

    Some of the states the average farm size is barely 50 acres and a $5000 dollar check is probably a pretty big deal, I’m running a little less than 3000 acres and an extra five grand would be pretty special around here. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 15, 2019 | 07:46 12 Again chuck only telling half the story .....
    one that fits his one sided story on near everything he posts on here . Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 15, 2019 | 07:49 13 Would it be better to hobble the most successful farmers till the most unsuccessful ones finally catch up?

    How do they track how much each farm gets in Gov't money in the US?
    Amazingly it's on the web!
    Good thing we have that kind of transparency in Canada. /sarc

    https://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?...heUnitedStates Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 07:53 14 I don't think taxpayers should be bailing out big farms in Canada or the USA.

    Target the limited support to medium or small farms.

    Improve the safety nets and keep politics and ad hoc payments out of the mix as much as possible.

    Don't complain about falling commodity prices and trade issues and then go on to support Trump. He is a big part of the reason this is happening.

    Scheer will not be able to influence China or the USA. Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 07:58 15 Some people don't understand....if big farmers get a big payment ..that cash move through the economy fast....

    If a guy buys a new combine with it ( I don't care ) it means there is probably a good used one and it trickles through to the small guy with 50 acres that can upgrade as he has always done...a good used 4 th owner combine...

    People have to start understanding the value of payments especially when the market is screwed up by things out of our control...

    You could be growing a 50 bpa canola crop and by the time its all done with black swan events whether by Trump or the unethical moron in Ottawa you could be losing money through no fault of your own...

    Tell your grandparents that built the farm with 20bpa 50/50 farming that a 50 bpa canola crop isn't making money...

    I think people have lost grasp of reality when they think farmers are making money this year...

    When a 70 year old- farm paid off - farmer told me this spring they would go through the motions ...I should have heeded the warning... it won't be a money maker... Reply With Quote

  • Aug 15, 2019 | 08:00 16
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    I don't think taxpayers should be bailing out big farms in Canada or the USA.

    Target the limited support to medium or small farms.

    Improve the safety nets and keep politics and ad hoc payments out of the mix as much as possible.

    Don't complain about falling commodity prices and trade issues and then go on to support Trump. He is a big part of the reason this is happening.

    Scheer will not be able to influence China or the USA.
    The fact we can't move product to China have anything to do with it....or India...or Italy...or Saudi Arabia....or anyone else that team of high and mighty libtards have pissed off???

    Blame Trump????? How about Trudeau .. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 15, 2019 | 08:01 17 I don't care if big farms get big payments...Once the dominoes start to fall with big farms and the reset starts ...if you think you are coming out unscathed by a reset ....you are needing to review history a little....not about the financial part of it but community, other business affected...

    I have seen it happen....you want your community to survive or fail? To fail just keep repeating that farmers don't need ad hoc payments....but don't complain when the dealer says the part will be here tomorrow or the next day because that is part of the equation people can't connect the dots on...

    When you take the blinders off you will understand why Quebec is doing so well ...community and tightly held values and monster payments from the rest of Canada..

    People have to start taking a wider angle view than saying """" we don't need adhoc payments because it makes us look bad or I don't need them so why should anyone else....""""
    Last edited by bucket; Aug 15, 2019 at 08:21.
    Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 15, 2019 | 08:14 18 Maybe cluck cluck likes trudopes hair?
    What else could it be
    Maybe he really dislikes trumps hair Reply With Quote
    Aug 15, 2019 | 09:50 19 Remember, to the socialists, it is all about the equal distribution of poverty, that is far preferable to the unequal distribution of wealth. Drag everyone down to the same level, no one should aspire to anything better.
    Each and every day, 10 men go to a restaurant for dinner together. The bill for all 10 comes to $100 each day. If the bill were paid the way we pay our taxes, the first four would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1; the sixth would pay $3; the seventh $7; the eighth $12; the ninth $18. The 10th man – the richest – would pay $59. Although the 10 men didn't share the bill equally, they all seemed content enough with the arrangement – until the restaurant owner threw them a curve.

    "You're all very good customers," the owner said, "so I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20. I'm going to charge you just $80 in total." The 10 men looked at each other and seemed genuinely surprised, but quite happy about the news.

    The first four men, of course, are unaffected because they weren't paying anything for their meals anyway. They'll still eat for free. The big question is how to divvy up the $20 in savings among the remaining six in a way that's fair for each of them. They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33, but if they subtract that amount from each person's share, then the fifth and sixth men would end up being paid to eat their meals. The restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each person's bill by roughly the same percentage, and he proceeded to work out the amounts that each should pay.

    The results? The fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $14, leaving the 10th man with a bill of $50 instead of $59. Outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got one dollar out of the $20," said the sixth man, pointing to the 10th man, "and he got $9!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too! It's not fair that he got nine times more than me!" "That's true," shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get back $9 when I only got $2? The rich get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

    The nine outraged men surrounded the 10th and brutally assaulted him. The next day, he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they faced a problem that they hadn't faced before. They were $50 short.
    Reply With Quote

  • Aug 15, 2019 | 18:51 20 Chucky why not try some different reading material?

    When my kids were in school they would sell magazine subscriptions as a fundraiser, so i always tried to buy something different every year from them. One year I got ''The Manitoba Cooperator'' because I thought it would have some Ag content. Well holy crap after the first issue, all it was was extreme left wing propaganda. Never opened another issue, only used them to light the stove. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 16, 2019 | 07:43 21 As this Reuters article republished in the Cooperator explained, most of the subsidies and support go to farms who probably don't need it.

    This can drive up the price of land squeezing smaller farms who already can't compete with the bigger ones.

    Its interesting that some posters are concerned about the transfer of wealth, but then go on to support just that, in the form of taxpayers payments to make up for bad political decisions in the US and a trade war they didn't want.

    If you support politicians who are in favour of protectionism and trade wars that end up hurting you, don't be expecting to be bailed out by the large majority of taxpayers who are non-farmers.

    Trudeau's role in the trade war is minimal. The USA asked for the Huawei woman to be arrested. India put tariffs on primarily for domestic political reasons. Trudeau could do a better job on these trade issues. But Scheer has not said how he will fix the problems that are mostly beyond Canada's influence.

    Trudeau may be an idiot, but many of you are supporting the much bigger idiot to the south who is driving us into a recession and screwing up ag markets big time. Reply With Quote
    Aug 16, 2019 | 07:54 22 Robin hood syndrome. just like fellow merrymen(persons), trudope and jugmeet. Reply With Quote
    Aug 16, 2019 | 07:55 23
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    As this Reuters article republished in the Cooperator explained, most of the subsidies and support go to farms who probably don't need it.

    This can drive up the price of land squeezing smaller farms who already can't compete with the bigger ones.

    Its interesting that some posters are concerned about the transfer of wealth, but then go on to support just that, in the form of taxpayers payments to make up for bad political decisions in the US and a trade war they didn't want.

    If you support politicians who are in favour of protectionism and trade wars that end up hurting you, don't be expecting to be bailed out by the large majority of taxpayers who are non-farmers.

    Trudeau's role in the trade war is minimal. The USA asked for the Huawei woman to be arrested. India put tariffs on primarily for domestic political reasons. Trudeau could do a better job on these trade issues. But Scheer has not said how he will fix the problems that are mostly beyond Canada's influence.

    Trudeau may be an idiot, but many of you are supporting the much bigger idiot to the south who is driving us into a recession and screwing up ag markets big time.

    But Trudeau has the resources to match Trump's MFP the same way Harper had to match the US governments bailout of the auto sector....that by the way never made the taxpayer whole....

    All Trudeau has to do is quit sending billions all over the world for no good reason...pay farmers and give the countries that need help our grain...

    Every US government would rather give away their grain than the money...because its better for the US economy ....to keep the spending at home...

    The issues in canadian agriculture today are Trudeau's fault...While Yerry really fu*cked western farmers ,,,,Trudeau has had 4 years to fix it...and its a simple fix.... Reply With Quote
    Aug 16, 2019 | 08:03 24 There is no reason for Trudeau to send money to farmers to bail them out when they vote Conservative anyway.

    In the US, Trump is sending money to farmers to keep their vote after he created their big trade problems.

    Its pretty simple politics Trump is buying votes and Trudeau doesn't need your vote.

    Isn't politics just great.

    Neither party has a long term plan to keep small and medium farmers in business. They are both happy to let grain farmers prosper in a "free" market.

    The poor economics of agriculture that has been putting many farmers out of business, has been a long term problem through many Conservative and Liberal governments. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 16, 2019 | 08:16 25
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    There is no reason for Trudeau to send money to farmers to bail them out when they vote Conservative anyway.

    In the US, Trump is sending money to farmers to keep their vote after he created their big trade problems.

    Its pretty simple politics Trump is buying votes and Trudeau doesn't need your vote.

    Isn't politics just great.

    Neither party has a long term plan to keep small and medium farmers in business. They are both happy to let grain farmers prosper in a "free" market.

    The poor economics of agriculture that has been putting many farmers out of business, has been a long term problem through many Conservative and Liberal governments.
    Chuck chuck

    I think we could have a conversation about your statement " Neither party has a long term plan to keep small and medium farmers in business "

    Its very true and that started under Ritz....look at his advisors ....all "giddyup lets go" types with no regard for what was happening in ag....its going to come home to roost in the next couple years when a 50bpa crop is break even for these guys....and grandpa's money has run out or depreciated in machinery decals....

    Some on here will call me depressing....nope...just realistic....and I am pretty handy with a calculator....


    Bottom line....Ritz and his advisers had zero vision for agriculture....ZERO....and whats worse is they can't even admit it....they are no better than Trudeau and ethics.... Reply With Quote
    Aug 16, 2019 | 09:58 26
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    As this Reuters article republished in the Cooperator explained, most of the subsidies and support go to farms who probably don't need it.

    This can drive up the price of land squeezing smaller farms who already can't compete with the bigger ones.

    Its interesting that some posters are concerned about the transfer of wealth, but then go on to support just that, in the form of taxpayers payments to make up for bad political decisions in the US and a trade war they didn't want.

    If you support politicians who are in favour of protectionism and trade wars that end up hurting you, don't be expecting to be bailed out by the large majority of taxpayers who are non-farmers.

    Trudeau's role in the trade war is minimal. The USA asked for the Huawei woman to be arrested. India put tariffs on primarily for domestic political reasons. Trudeau could do a better job on these trade issues. But Scheer has not said how he will fix the problems that are mostly beyond Canada's influence.

    Trudeau may be an idiot, but many of you are supporting the much bigger idiot to the south who is driving us into a recession and screwing up ag markets big time.
    This can drive up the price of land Something we can actually agree on. Market distorting payments are never good, removing all the proper price signals which would otherwise serve to balance the supply and demand. But more importantly, they eventually get bid into the price of land or rent, to the point where they have no net effect on incomes anyways. But it is not a big farm vs. small farm issue, all are getting the same price for the same acre in the same area. One of the few areas where government is not biased against those who are more ambitious and successful. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like