Generic anti-market criticisms from the quoted, without a lot of specifics…

Is it just a price issue? External completion? Increased input prices?

One key claim appears to be that there are so few buyers for their products, and sellers of their inputs (and, speculation on my part, those are maybe sometimes the same parties) that “magically” the numbers always work out that their costs shoot up any time their income does, so their margins always have them right on the edge of failure.

(I don’t know how true this is)

	▲	Fade_Dance a day ago \| parent [-]
		It's somewhere in the middle. Ex: there isn't a literal potash or nitrogen monopoly, since it's a worldwide market. There is arguably an oligopoly on some levels, and then at the producer level you can see some OPEC style arrangements. They are at the bottom and the players above them have leverage on every level. Unfortunately the way for them to gain power at the base level is to consolidate and grow - agriculture mega-farms - but that's something there also strongly fighting against. Ultimately smaller farmers probably need to be some sort of protected class, which they already sort of are, but not to a proper extent to ensure their survival as they argue. This is the state of things in many countries in the world now, which is something that they see and accept but do not necessarily like, but that won't change policy in regards to Indian dairy Farmers or what have you so there's little prospect except frustration. Even in aggressive trade negotiations with tariffs flying over the seas at full bore, things like fishery rights and such often turn out to be the most steadfast holdouts. Not easy to change. Or perhaps the trend of consolidation will simply continue, and there is an imminent wave of small farm bankruptcy.

▲

kulahan 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Seemed highly specific to me. Monopolization of suppliers who lobby for bailouts instead of change, knowing that bailout money goes straight from farmers to the suppliers.

▲

sparrish a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the truth is we have too many farmers and instead of letting the market decide which ones continue and which ones fold, we subsidise to keep them all going. It's been happening for decades and needs to change. It'll be a painful change but necessary for a healthy farm market where the farmers that remain can produce plenty and get good prices for their crops.

I did some computer work for a large family farm in north east Colorado. A letter from the state was framed and hanging next to the desk. It showed a list of family-owned farms in the state and how many sections (640 acre lots - 1 mile square) each farm had in CRP (Conservation Reserve Program), which is the state of Colorado paying farmers not to farm, and how much money they received. This family farm was at the top of the list, receiving millions of dollars each year to not farm.

I have no pity for the American farmer.

▲

alephnerd 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I've posted a similar article on HN about the dairy industry [0] - the economics are the same.

[0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44818463