Very informative, thank you for the great reporting Nina.
I have a very heterodox question that won’t make me any friends in America’s heartland (but it’s a genuine question, so hold the gunfire…): Do we actually want to prop up commodity crops?
My immediate thoughts are: First, the negative side is that such crops don’t really provide nourishment to people. Second, they find their ways into highly processed food and the subsidies beneath them are part of why processed food is so dangerously cheap. And third, they’re produced in such massive quantities as to (arguably) (a) necessitate the current “get big or get out” status quo and (b) require extensive chemical use which is harmful to both the land and people’s health.
The more favorable side of the ledger is that: First, they are a critical input into many non-food industries and products, such as their role in Ethanol. Second, our abundant supply of such crops (and the world’s comparatively lesser supply and high demand) provides the US with further leverage in foreign affairs. And third, their production is central to farm livelihoods and local/state tax bases in the middle of the country.
Curious to hear your informed perspective on this question, hope all is well.
From what I gather, most people (including farmers) who care about the environment in the heartland do not agree with propping up commodity crops, nor do they think ethanol is a good thing. The health, environmental, and mental effects of large-scale industrialized agriculture outweigh perceived pros for many folks I speak to. Would definitely recommend checking out work from Austin Frerick & Silvia Secchi on this!
I ask the question because a few of the perspectives in your piece were predicated on a logic of: Tariffs -> bad for soybean & corn growers -> boneheaded policy. And I just found that logic less convincing because I’m not sure soybean and corn considerations should dominate views on Ag matter (unless they should, which I’m open to hearing a reasoning for).
Found the perspectives you illuminated around anti trust & processing to be much more compelling, for what that’s worth.
Great to hear the views on the upcoming election from farmers whose voices are not heard often enough.
Very informative, thank you for the great reporting Nina.
I have a very heterodox question that won’t make me any friends in America’s heartland (but it’s a genuine question, so hold the gunfire…): Do we actually want to prop up commodity crops?
My immediate thoughts are: First, the negative side is that such crops don’t really provide nourishment to people. Second, they find their ways into highly processed food and the subsidies beneath them are part of why processed food is so dangerously cheap. And third, they’re produced in such massive quantities as to (arguably) (a) necessitate the current “get big or get out” status quo and (b) require extensive chemical use which is harmful to both the land and people’s health.
The more favorable side of the ledger is that: First, they are a critical input into many non-food industries and products, such as their role in Ethanol. Second, our abundant supply of such crops (and the world’s comparatively lesser supply and high demand) provides the US with further leverage in foreign affairs. And third, their production is central to farm livelihoods and local/state tax bases in the middle of the country.
Curious to hear your informed perspective on this question, hope all is well.
From what I gather, most people (including farmers) who care about the environment in the heartland do not agree with propping up commodity crops, nor do they think ethanol is a good thing. The health, environmental, and mental effects of large-scale industrialized agriculture outweigh perceived pros for many folks I speak to. Would definitely recommend checking out work from Austin Frerick & Silvia Secchi on this!
Understood, that jives with my priors.
I ask the question because a few of the perspectives in your piece were predicated on a logic of: Tariffs -> bad for soybean & corn growers -> boneheaded policy. And I just found that logic less convincing because I’m not sure soybean and corn considerations should dominate views on Ag matter (unless they should, which I’m open to hearing a reasoning for).
Found the perspectives you illuminated around anti trust & processing to be much more compelling, for what that’s worth.