Thread: Trump plans emergency aid to farmers affected by his tariffs

Originally Posted by Judy

That enables them to keep up their purchases from the farmers which stabilizes the prices.

Then lets do it for oil. Let's "stabilize" those prices since they affect just about every other price!

Originally Posted by jtdc

Then lets do it for oil. Let's "stabilize" those prices since they affect just about every other price!

Trump already took care of that with 2 phone calls two or three weeks ago, one to Putin and one to Saudi Arabia to increase OPEC production. He asked them to increase production to lower the prices and they did. See, you get all types of good stuff when you know how to make friends and who to make friends with. He can't do that with the EU, Canada, Mexico and China, they're selfish and don't know how to be good friends to our country. Hopefully, they'll learn soon.

Originally Posted by Judy

Oh those are different programs put in place by other people. . . These programs Trump is planning to implement are temporary short-term programs. . .

Everyone should try to remember, this isn't about the price of lettuce, it's about producing more automobiles and other such products in the United States versus importing them from overseas. It's about our manufactured durable goods, not our food, we just don't want to damage our food supply in the negotiation process, and this will help protect that sector while we try to fix the other sector.

"The aid will be facilitated by the Commodity Credit Corp, an agency set up during the Great Depression, and will not require congressional approval.

The aid will come from a mix of programs overseen by the USDA, including direct payments to producers of some goods, including soybeans, as well as distribution assistance for producers of goods that can be easily provided to food banks, such as fruits, nuts, rice, legumes, and some meats."

Federal aid for farmers is nothing new, but Trump's bailout is

By Tami Luhby
Updated 7:56 AM ET, Wed July 25, 2018

(CNN)American farmers already receive billions of dollars in federal aid every year to protect them when prices fall due to weather or market fluctuations.

The Trump administration juiced this long-standing safety net by pledging an additional $12 billion in aid Tuesday -- but this time, it's to compensate some farmers and ranchers from the fallout of President Donald Trump's widening trade feuds. The nation's agriculture sector has seen prices drop and supplies pile up as other countries impose tariffs to counter Trump's actions.

The effort is unusual because of its magnitude and because it originates from the executive branch, not Congress.

It's also notable that it comes in reaction to a "self-inflicted disaster," said Joseph Glauber, senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington, DC.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Tuesday that it will utilize a Great Depression-era law to send payments to producers of dairy, hogs and certain crops. It will also purchase surpluses of commodities including fruits, nuts, rice, beef, pork and milk and distribute them to food banks and other nutrition programs. And the agency will work with the private sector to develop new export markets for farmers.

The new funding, which some Republican lawmakers slammed as "welfare," comes on top of federal backstops that have been authorized by Congress through farm bills that date back to the 1930s. Spending on farm safety-net programs has been about $16 billion, on average, over the past 20 years, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Farmers can receive payments if their prices or revenues fall below a certain level, or they may get support to farm in a way that's friendly to the environment, such as constructing terraces to prevent soil erosion. Also, the Agriculture Department may buy their products to help soak up excess inventory. Think the government cheese program from the 1970s, when the agency helped support dairy farmers.

These protections were originally implemented to guarantee the nation had adequate food and feed supply, which was crucial to growing the economy, said Chad Hart, an agriculture economist with Iowa State University.

Now, however, the United States has a booming agriculture export business, which has made trade even more important to farmers. China is the largest market for American farmers, while Canada and Mexico are also substantial buyers of U.S. agricultural goods.

"Most producers were very happy with the way trade was going," Hart said, noting that many farm sectors run a trade surplus.

Many experts and farm groups see the administration's plan as an immediate fix for the industry's losses. But it doesn't address the long-term pain that farmers will feel if the tariffs remain in place.

"The $12 billion package of agricultural assistance announced today by the administration will provide a welcome measure of temporary relief to our farmers and ranchers who are experiencing the financial effects of the trade war," said Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, a trade group. "This announcement is substantial, but we cannot overstate the dire consequences that farmers and ranchers are facing in relation to lost export markets ... We will continue to push for a swift and sure end to the trade war and the tariffs impacting American agriculture."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/25/polit...ade/index.html

Originally Posted by Judy

Trump already took care of that with 2 phone calls two or three weeks ago, one to Putin and one to Saudi Arabia to increase OPEC production. He asked them to increase production to lower the prices and they did. See, you get all types of good stuff when you know how to make friends and who to make friends with. He can't do that with the EU, Canada, Mexico and China, they're selfish and don't know how to be good friends to our country. Hopefully, they'll learn soon.

Russia and OPEC oil production increases have very little to do with pressure from Trump and he's certainly not solely responsible for their change in direction. China and India have also been calling for an increase in production.

OPEC and Russia had originally agreed to cut production through 2018 to reduce global stocks, but the goal was actually met sooner and the current inventory is now near OPEC's target. So, for OPEC the rapid decline in oil inventories and worries about supplies after the U.S. decision to withdraw from the international nuclear deal with Iran, as well as Venezuela's collapsing output, were behind the chance in OPEC's thinking, not a phone call from Trump.

A $12 billion farm bailout is a bad idea


Chris Pandolfo · July 24, 2018

Font Size A A A

Tatiana Popova | Shutterstock

President Trump is reportedly preparing a plan for a $12 billion bailout for farmers aversely affected by his administration’s tariff policy. If true, this is a very bad idea.

News of the supposed plan was leaked to the media by anonymous sources, so it is possible that this is just an idea being floated to see how the public reacts. Specific details are scarce, but according to CNBC, the billion-dollar plan will “use existing programs designed to mitigate price and coverage risks, and could target dairy, pork and soy products.”

Trump has imposed 25 percent tariffs on Chinese machine and tech imports and has threatened to increase tariffs on as much as $500 billion of Chinese goods. China turned around and slapped dollar-for-dollar tariffs on U.S. farm products in response to tariffs raised by the Trump administration. This is the textbook definition of a trade war, which is not “easy to win” and has consequences. One of the consequences is bad for American farmers, who are seeing their exports to China decrease, the prices for their crops fall, and are losing money and staring bankruptcy in the face.

Tariffs are taxes on American consumers. They raise the prices on goods we buy, and retaliatory tariffs hurt the goods we sell to other countries. President Trump has experimented with raising tariffs, inviting retaliation, and now his administration is considering increasing government spending to fix a problem it created.

The arsonist is trying to put out the fire, and some lawmakers are not happy about it.

Senator Rand Paul
✔@RandPaul

Tariffs are taxes that punish American consumers and producers. If tariffs punish farmers, the answer is not welfare for farmers — the answer is remove the tariffs.
12:19 PM - Jul 24, 2018

• 
  18.4K
• 
  8,336 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Haley Byrd
✔@byrdinator

Ben Sasse responds to White House plan to bail out agriculture industry amid Trump’s various trade wars
12:41 PM - Jul 24, 2018

• 
  234
• 
  108 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

If this plan was leaked as a trial balloon, it needs to be shot down in flames.

Opposing this bailout is not an anti-Trump position. It is not anti-farmer either. It’s an acknowledgement that with a $21 trillion national debt and with a projected $1 trillion deficit in 2019, there is no justification to spend $12 billion when the real problem is U.S. tariff policy.

Conservatives should oppose a tax-payer funded government bailout to put a bandaid on a problem the government created. Hopefully President Trump will listen to conservatives and reverse course.

https://www.conservativereview.com/n...is-a-bad-idea/

The new funding, which some Republican lawmakers slammed as "welfare," comes on top of federal backstops that have been authorized by Congress through farm bills that date back to the 1930s. Spending on farm safety-net programs has been about $16 billion, on average, over the past 20 years, according to the Congressional Research Service.

So for at least the past 20 years, US taxpayers have spent $16 billion a year through "farm bills" on "safety-net" programs for farmers. What did taxpayers get in return? Did we get our borders secured? No. Did we get our bad trade deals fixed? No. Did our economy grow? No. Did poverty decline? No. Did wages rise? No. Did we get peace everywhere? No. Did we make new friends anywhere? No. Did we fix our infrastructure? No.

In the scheme of the federal budget, $16 billion a year to help our farmers and protect our food supply is not a big deal, but we didn't get anything in return that we know of that matters to most Americans.

This $12 billion over some short period of time, probably 1 to 3 years, gives our President the leverage of calm in our markets that he needs to show strength, unity and preparedness for huge negotiations with the EU, China, Mexico and Canada to fix our bad trade deals which if successful will continue to grow our economy, raise wages from new good jobs from new manufacturing plants, and balance these awful trade deficits that are sucking $800 billion a year of money, wealth, jobs and well-being out from under the American people. It won't solve every problem we have, but it helps solve every problem we have related to bad trade deals. If our farmers and their "trade federations" don't understand and appreciate that, then hiss boo on them.

This President ran on fixing our bad trade deals. It's one of the primary reasons he won the election. He's out there doing was he was elected to do. This isn't one of those internal domestic issues where everyone can blame everyone else for who shot John, this is an international issue with the USA against the WORLD, so Americans need to recognize the importance of this and stand together to achieve this goal of more balanced trade that serves the best interests of the United States and all our citizens, workers, businesses and taxpayers, not just our farmers.

Originally Posted by MW

A $12 billion farm bailout is a bad idea


Chris Pandolfo · July 24, 2018

Font Size A A A

Tatiana Popova | Shutterstock

President Trump is reportedly preparing a plan for a $12 billion bailout for farmers aversely affected by his administration’s tariff policy. If true, this is a very bad idea.

News of the supposed plan was leaked to the media by anonymous sources, so it is possible that this is just an idea being floated to see how the public reacts. Specific details are scarce, but according to CNBC, the billion-dollar plan will “use existing programs designed to mitigate price and coverage risks, and could target dairy, pork and soy products.”

Trump has imposed 25 percent tariffs on Chinese machine and tech imports and has threatened to increase tariffs on as much as $500 billion of Chinese goods. China turned around and slapped dollar-for-dollar tariffs on U.S. farm products in response to tariffs raised by the Trump administration. This is the textbook definition of a trade war, which is not “easy to win” and has consequences. One of the consequences is bad for American farmers, who are seeing their exports to China decrease, the prices for their crops fall, and are losing money and staring bankruptcy in the face.

Tariffs are taxes on American consumers. They raise the prices on goods we buy, and retaliatory tariffs hurt the goods we sell to other countries. President Trump has experimented with raising tariffs, inviting retaliation, and now his administration is considering increasing government spending to fix a problem it created.

The arsonist is trying to put out the fire, and some lawmakers are not happy about it.

Senator Rand Paul
✔@RandPaul

Tariffs are taxes that punish American consumers and producers. If tariffs punish farmers, the answer is not welfare for farmers — the answer is remove the tariffs.
12:19 PM - Jul 24, 2018

• 
  18.4K
• 
  8,336 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Haley Byrd
✔@byrdinator

Ben Sasse responds to White House plan to bail out agriculture industry amid Trump’s various trade wars
12:41 PM - Jul 24, 2018

• 
  234
• 
  108 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

If this plan was leaked as a trial balloon, it needs to be shot down in flames.

Opposing this bailout is not an anti-Trump position. It is not anti-farmer either. It’s an acknowledgement that with a $21 trillion national debt and with a projected $1 trillion deficit in 2019, there is no justification to spend $12 billion when the real problem is U.S. tariff policy.

Conservatives should oppose a tax-payer funded government bailout to put a bandaid on a problem the government created. Hopefully President Trump will listen to conservatives and reverse course.

https://www.conservativereview.com/n...is-a-bad-idea/

Looks like somebody doesn't really want to fix our bad trade deals. Looks like somebody enjoys watching the world rob our piggy bank of $800 billion a year in lost sales in goods due to unfair trade deals that have bankrupted our country and impoverished our citizens. Shame! Shame! Shame!

Short press conference with President of EU Commission and Trump a few minutes ago, seemed friendly, Trump sounded firm but positive, and headed in right direction. They'll meet now and then come out with another press conference later today. Hope all goes well, hope our President is armed with all the support he needs from our citizens and politicians to pull off a great new trade deal with the EU that will balance our trade deficit with them.