Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “With all the knowledge that we have about how things grow and how the earth works and how better to grow crops so they can produce more, we still have to have some kind of a federal overlord or government overlord supervising this? I thought we were more evolved than that. The Romans had licked farming. Hell, the Egyptians had licked farming. Here we are 5,000 years later, [mocking] ‘We can’t do it without the Department of Agriculture telling us how or subsidizing us.’ Really?” Check out today’s transcript for the rest… Begin Mike Church Show Transcript Mike: From Bloomberg, “An extension of U.S. agriculture subsidies.” I also would ask the question again: Why is the United States Department of Agriculture, why is it subsidizing agriculture? It would seem to me that if you had a Department of Agriculture, the purpose of it would be to maybe, and this is a big maybe, under the weights and measures clause in the Constitution, maybe they would say:
Mike Church’s Founders Tradin’ Post announces Christmas discount program. Take 20% off purchases of $100 and $50 off of purchases over $200.
You guys that sell wheat sell it in bushels. You guys that sell milk, sell it in ounces or pounds. You guys that sell whatever, you sell it in pounds. That would be the extent of their power, but that’s not the extent of their power. The extent of their power is to control the price. If the price is too high, I wonder what happens. When the price is too low, I know what happens, they send you a check. Couldn’t we grow our own food without having the Feds subsidize it? I think that we could. How many of you people out there go to farmer’s markets in your local hamlets on any given Saturday when the growing season is in and it’s not freezing cold winter and global cooling is not here? Why do you go to your local farmer’s market? You probably go there thinking the stuff is grown nearby, it’s probably grown organically, and it’s as fresh as could possibly be. Do you think that the farmer that brought the bell peppers or zucchini or cucumber to the farmer’s market, do you think he has a deal that he has made with the Department of Agriculture, and in the absence of that deal, would he still be bringing his vegetables to the market? Well, if we go back 1,000 years, ask the same question and I think you’ll find your answer for today. With all the knowledge that we have about how things grow and how the earth works and how better to grow crops so they can produce more, we still have to have some kind of a federal overlord or government overlord supervising this? I thought we were more evolved than that. The Romans had licked farming. Hell, the Egyptians had licked farming. Here we are 5,000 years later, [mocking] “We can’t do it without the Department of Agriculture telling us how or subsidizing us.” Really? [reading]
An extension of U.S. agriculture subsidies to late January was rebuffed yesterday by Senate Democrats, who said they won’t pass any House plan for temporary funding before Congress breaks for the holidays.
“We’re not going to do an extension,” Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat, told reporters. “If the House leadership would just stay through next week, like the Senate is staying, we would actually be able to get” a new five-year farm-policy bill, she said.
Mike: Think about that, five-year farm policy. Let me ask you people that are farmers a question: Can you buy a five-year insurance policy that is going to be in effect and never change or five years? I bet you can’t. Let me ask those that shop with the GEICO gecko or with Flo or with the mayhem dude from Allstate, could you buy a five-year policy? I suppose you could, but if you crash into someone or someone crashes into you, it’s going to be null and void because they’re going to adjust it. What would make you think you can accurately predict or project any kind of farm activity for five years? On the surface this stuff is ridiculous. Of course, there’s a reason they do it, and that’s because the big agribusinesses need to be able to plan out just how large the grift or wealth redistribution is going to be over the next five years, so they can figure out how to maximize their profits knowing what share of their revenue is coming from OPM, other people’s money. [reading]
If Congress doesn’t act before year’s end, U.S. dairy support programs will revert to a 1949 statute that when fully implemented would double the wholesale price of milk. [Mike: Right about now you’re wishing you hadn’t taken that cow to the market and sold it for those magic beans, aren’t you, Jack?]
The Agriculture Department hasn’t said when it could implement the law, which could take months. Lawmakers are reluctant to head home for the holidays to headlines about milk prices of $7-per-gallon in the new year.
Cuts to food stamps, along with changes to crop insurance programs and other farm aid . . .
[end reading] Mike: Farm aid, await a minute, I’ve heard this before, farm aid, farm aid. Hold on, don’t tell me. Eric: Isn’t it a concert? Mike: I was just getting ready to say, I’m thinking John Cougar Melonhead. I’m thinking Willie Nelson. Maybe we just call Willie Nelson: Hey, Willie, when you’re done paying the IRS off, can you do a concert for milk drinkers? Can you see the headlines? “Concert For Milk Drinkers,” I like it. [reading]
The main effect of an extension to the end of January would be to allay fears of milk prices rising after Jan. 1 . . .
Mike: So what you’re learning here in the early moments of the Mike Church Show on a Thursday, 12 December 2013 is that not even milk is beyond the reach of our magisterial federal overlords. Congress has their hands in the milk industry. Not only do they have their hands in the milk industry, they’re regulating it and subsidizing it. I guess you do this ostensibly under the premise that milk farmers are too stupid or not skilled enough to produce milk and bring it to market without the guidance of their local United States Department of Agriculture representative. [reading]
Under the law, the government would be required to stockpile milk until it reached [Mike: How stupid is this?] $37.20 per hundred pounds, nearly double the current price of dairy futures traded in Chicago.
Other commodities, including corn and wheat, would see their programs revert to archaic programs later in the year.
[end reading] Mike: We can’t have that, now, can we? I saw this story posted at Mish Shedlock’s Global Economic Trend Analysis blog last night. He asks a couple pertinent questions, I think. Why are food stamps tied to farm bills? Because the big ConAgra, Archer Daniels Midland, Del Monte and what have you, the big companies are the ones that make the processed foods that, in many cases, are distributed as part of the SNAP program. They are paid to make the food, that’s why. It’s another example of corporatism. We have a big one today. How many of you heard about the Google bigwigs getting tax-free airplane fuel? Wait till you hear this. Another question: Why do we have crop supports? Another good question. You mean to tell me that in the land of the free and the mobile home of the brave where the lyricist Kathy Bates in the 1870s climbed to the top of Pike’s Peak and saw amber waves of grain as far as she could see in the middle of the summer, you mean to tell me we can’t grow enough wheat to feed people and that we have to have this supervised by government overlords? I just don’t get it. End Mike Church Show Transcript