On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 EvMick@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/15/00 3:58:51 PM Central Standard Time,
> CurtAdams@aol.com writes:
> > In addition, the farmer can
> > reduce the acreage of soybeans, reducing water consumption, habitat
> > destruction, etc.
> I don't think that will happen....why would a farmer reduce his acerage? I
> think he'd continue to plant the same amount of acerage and make more
> money....(all things of course...being equal)
Well EvMick, many farmers over the last 30 years or so have been
getting paid by the government not to plant as much as they could.
I think this was done primarily to keep the crop prices high
so as to allow the farmers at the margin (usually small farms)
to continue to operate. I know the government trend was to
decrease this market distorting subsidy in the long run but
I'm not sure whether or not this is still being done.
Great deal if you can get it -- don't plant some of your land because
the government pays you not to and plant higher yield crops on the
remaining land so you end up producing as much as if you had planted
the all of the land with the low yield crops...
I must be in the wrong business.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:20 MDT