I am not so sure that these subsidies were or are a bad idea, except for the criteria determining eligibility.

I do not see how you can turn a farm "on" and "off", based on whether financial markets treat trading for foreign foodstuffs.

Can you?

Suppose that Chilean oranges are subsidized by their government, and a few thousand tons can be shipped to the USA for sale at half the price of California or Florida oranges. What happens to the groves in those states?

Ah Farm subs, the reason we have HFC instead of real cane sugar.

Amy, please read my comment.

It looks to me like you're adding your own meaning.

Keyword: "criteria".

A unique feature of farming is that crops cannot be turned on and off at will – just because market conditions might or did change. Now, if you need 2 years lead time to sow your oats, so to speak, then let me know.

Here is a scenario that I think might help:
Small farm looks at American market, and decides to plant 160 acres of corn. That costs a big chunk of change. Then, market conditions change which make it impossible even to harvest the 160 acres without incurring a loss.
Note: "market conditions" are not determined simply by consumption of corn, but include Wall Street speculation.

I agree that subsidies might not be properly extended to conglomerates which are diversified, like ADM, but the subsidy might seem useful to keep small farms from going under through no fault of their own.

A unique feature of farming is that crops cannot be turned on and off at will – just because market conditions might or did change. Now, if you need 2 years lead time to sow your oats, so to speak, then let me know. -- Radwaste at November 19, 2013 5:00 PM

The problem is that an 800 pound gorilla (the Fed) is changing how the capital market works.

The way the system works now is that farmer's and companies will plant a crop that they know will probably fail in the off rotation field and then plow it under.

And corporate farms are also not strictly corporate farms either anymore.

Years ago a mom and dad farmer could just simply let their kids inherit the 160 acres from them and the kids could continue farming. But now because of inheritance laws that 150acres is worth millions; but only cost $16,000 when the parents bought it 1942.

So many families have been forced to create some type of corporation like an LLC so that the kids can inherit with no taxes. So that is the modern corporate farm that you are looking at.

So now you are dealing with what is actually a family farm that is doing their best to keep going as a real idea, but has been distorted by the 800 pound gorilla.

Then there is the incentive to plant eggplant, or squash or a similar crop because they know it will fail. That is because they can buy crop insurance from the Fed. This is similar to buying flood insurance. Even though flood insurance is technically bought from your home insurance company it is paid by the Fed. Same with crop insurance.

So blaming corporate farms is not accurate. Blaming farmers for not taking advantage of a stupid system is similar to blaming coupon users for getting a free can of food because of a double coupon issue.