9 of 14

No

Write now Article Tools

Using Mike Huckabee's reasons for farm subsidies, I will argue against them.

1. We must be able to feed ourselves as part of our national security.
*While America prepares for the day when Mike Huckabee sees the U.S. unable to receive food from outside of its borders, consumers will be faced with higher food prices and taxes and the economy will be hampered. Huckabee implies that the United States will produce less food if subsidies are lowered or eliminated. In fact, Australia and New Zealand can act as case studies to the contrary. After freeing their agricultural markets, they have not experienced any trouble with their food supplies. Both efficiency and competition have increased amongst farmers. As well, two-thirds of American farmers do not receive support from the government. The majority of the market produces quite capably on its own. America will never need to worry about a situation in which we will not be able to feed ourselves. The wealth of fruitful land and impressive machinery will enable America to battle the improbable situation of feeding the entire country without any help from outside of the borders.

2. We must help our farmers lead the way to energy independence.
*Firstly, there is more evidence that ethanol is not the savior once thought of in terms of clean energy (i.e. smog, increased greenhouse gases). Yet, Huckabee wishes to spend billions of the taxpayers dollars chasing an ineffective means of energy independence. Secondly, the market, be it agricultural, automotive, research, will find the answer to energy independence on its own. If the government wants to help, then a tax on carbon, which would make finding an alternative energy worth the cost, is the most efficient way of going about it. However, using the excuse of "leading the way to energy independence" as a reason for protectionism is not honest.
3. As a percentage of national income, we spend only half as much on food as people in other developed countries. Subsidies help keep our food costs low by keeping production levels high.
* Wrong. Other than the obvious (and large) costs of higher taxes and damage to the economy, subsidies directly raise food prices as well. Milk prices are high due to government controls and U.S. sugar stands at approximately twice the world price. In other words, every product made with U.S. sugar is more expensive than it would be if agriculture was a completely free market. As well, the high production levels are wasteful, misallocated, and

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Should American farmers continue to receive government subsidies??
We want to hear your view. Write now!