by Jobie Weetaluktuk

Created on: July 06, 2007

I am not an American, so I'd have to say no. I'm a Canadian, so I'd have to say double no. No and no. American farmers should not be receiving government subsidies anymore. From this side of the border, you'd think that farmers or other producers who receiver government subsidies should be swallowed up by the earth and chewed by the jaws of hell. You'd think that no American would ever be caught receiving any government money.

Even when there are natural disasters, some Americans make a haughty point of not taking any government assistance.

One of the problems producers have from subsidies is the influx of cheap (relatively cheap) produce from places like California, Georgia, and Florida. These products come thousands of miles, cross the border, and still undersell local Canadian produce for instance. It is environmentally insensitive and competes unfairly with local producers.

Subsidies hinders the markets. Granted farmers have large overhead, poor working conditions (benefit plans), and around the clock work. They also do not make a lot of money. Yet, it is the market if it was truly free that could make it possible for them to thrive.

What the governments should be doing is supporting small local farmers and not agribusiness farmers. They are more of the entrepreneurial model than the agribusiness model which has more employees in proportion.

This would promote more diversity in production, more local marketing, and more local economic independence.

If would also free up the money to buy American produce to give to countries in need of food aid. That would be a noble, open, and legitimate way to give farmers government subsidies.

Learn more about this author, Jobie Weetaluktuk.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.