Free Essay

Effects of Government Subsidies on Small Farmers

In:

Submitted By jcartwr97
Words 2329
Pages 10
Effects of Government Subsidies on Small Farmers

DeVry University

Effects of Government Subsidies on Small Farmers
Growing up in the rural Midwest I have known and been close friends with quite a few farm families. Until reading The Omnivore’s Dilemma, I never fully understood the impact that government subsidies had on the average family farmer. While I understand the need for some government intervention to keep farmers able to work, I think the government has overstepped their boundaries and ended up hurting the very people these plans were put in place to protect. Current government farm subsidies are geared towards large corporations at the expense of small, family farmers: most farm subsidies are only paid for corn and soybean growers and leave out small farmers growing other crops while artificially lowering the price of these crops to sometimes below the actual cost of production, and the majority of farm subsidy payouts go to the top 10% of producers; some proposed solutions are to overhaul the current USDA farm subsidy programs to include farmers growing crops other than corn and soybeans, change the way the subsidies are paid to help bring the crop prices more in line with the cost of production, to put a cap on the amount of subsidies paid out to any individual farm or to just do away with the USDA farm subsidy program altogether.
Problems
Research shows that 90% of all USDA farm subsidies go to the growers of only 5 crops; corn, cotton, rice, wheat and soybeans (Monke, CSR Reports, 2006). There are currently restrictions in place for farmers that receive crop subsidies that they cannot plant other crops, namely fruits and vegetables, on their farms or they run the risk of losing their direct payments and counter-cyclical payments from the USDA (Monke, National Agriculture Law Center, 2008). This impacts small, family farmers the greatest as they are basically not allowed to expand beyond their basic staple crops. This limitation is “inconsistent with the rules of a minimally distorting subsidy” according to the World Trade Organization (Monke, 2008). This limitation directly affects the ability of farmers to grow other fruits and vegetables, which in turn results in higher fruit and vegetable prices for the general public and results in small farmers being unable to increase their revenue through alternate crops. With the artificially low cost of corn and soybeans in the market today there is an overabundance of these two staple crops. With the subsidies paid for these crops it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that they account for nearly two-thirds of all calories consumed in the United States (Kristof, 2009). With the cheap market prices, about 60% of corn and 47% of soybeans grown in the United States are used for livestock feed (Olson, 2006). This feed is then used by the meat industry to help get rid of the overabundance of these subsidized crops, reaping huge savings in the process. One study shows that these artificially low feed prices save the broiler chicken industry $11.25 billion and the hog production industry $8.5 billion between 1997 and 2005 (APHA, 2007). The main issue with this feed going to livestock that are not normally accustomed to eating these grains is that it causes severe sickness; so, to alleviate this issue, the livestock are constantly given antibiotics. These regular antibiotic treatments may directly contribute to the surge in antibiotic-resistant infections seen in recent years (APHA, 2007). According to government statistics, the top ten percent of farm entities collected a whopping 74% of all subsidies (EWG Farm Subsidy Database). On top of this, 62% of all farmers in the United States did not collect any subsidy payments (EWG Farm Subsidy Database). Some of these subsidy payments are being paid to landowners and farmers not even growing any crops due to the direct payment portion of the USDA farm bill. While there are limits on the amount of money that can be claimed by any one entity, there are many loopholes that allow some of the larger farming corporations to collect more than the set limit by subdividing their operations into multiple “paper companies” and collecting subsidy payments for all of these different entities (Hoefner, 2010). According to government records, from 1995-2010 the top ten percent of farms collected a staggering $165.9 billion in subsidy payments (EWG Farm Subsidy Database). This makes a huge impact on our national deficit and is an utter waste of taxpayer money. Politicians have been promising farm subsidy reform for years, most recently with President Obama’s campaign promises to close the mega farm loopholes, but sadly none have actually followed through on their promises (Hoefner, 2010). There have been numerous bills sent to congress to put a cap on the amounts paid to any individual farmer and to close some of the corporate farm loopholes, but unfortunately these bills have all been either voted down or rewritten to be what Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) calls “much ado about nothing” (Hoefner, 2010). If the USDA cannot, or chooses not to, enforce current regulations, how can we expect them to be able to overhaul the farm subsidy program at all? For example, a March 2011 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report showed that in October 2008 the USDA paid subsidies to thousands of farmers that were clearly exceeding the income eligibility caps instituted by the current farm bill (U.S. GAO, 2011). The same report also mentions $1.1 billion paid as of July 2007 to more than 170,000 deceased individuals and payments up to April 2004 to people not eligible according to the USDA’s own standards for “limited involvement in farming” because the agency has no controls in place to enforce their own rules (U.S. GAO, 2011). It is examples like these that prove that a major overhaul of the farm subsidy system is sorely needed and some outside oversight is needed when the new policies are put in place.

Solutions One possible solution for some of these issues is an overhaul of the USDA farm subsidy system to help subsidize crops other than corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice. There have been studies showing the economic impact that allowing farmers to grow alternate crops would have. One study by Iowa State University researchers showed that allowing farmers to change to alternate fruit and vegetable crops would generate almost $40 million dollars in increased farm sales and create a net total of 343 jobs in this state alone (Swenson, 2011). This would not only have a major economic impact on the local farmers and the state, but would also help employ an additional 595 people at an estimated 87 fruit and vegetable establishments, which would generate approximately $68.3 million in direct sales and $15.2 million in labor incomes (Swenson, 2011). Currently, a large portion of the federal farm subsidy budget is paid as direct payments to farmers, to the tune of about $5 billion per year (Masterson, 2011). These payments were introduced after the 1996 Farm Bill eliminated price supports, which had helped keep grain prices high for the previous 60 years, before prices dropped and farmers started struggling to get by (Masterson, 2011). These direct payments are paid to all farm owners, regardless of income or whether the farmer is even growing crops anymore, and are based on the acreage of crops grown in the mid 1980’s (Office of Management and Budget, 2011). Government statistics show that more than half of these direct payments are being paid to farmers with more than $100,000 in annual income. With the current record grain prices and farm income for 2011 estimated to be at an all-time high of $100.9 billion (USDA ERS, 2011), it is about time to get rid of these direct payments. The USDA also needs to look at putting a lower cap on the amount of subsidy payments that any one farm can receive and close the current loopholes that allow large corporate farms to collect subsidy payments for multiple sub-corporations. The current cap on subsidy payments to any one farm is at $40,000 with a limit on non-farm earnings of $500,000 and a limit on farm earnings of $750,000 (Brasher, 2011). Both the GAO and the USDA Commission on the Application of Payment Limitations for Agriculture clearly stated that the “actively engaged in farming” rules and the “active management” loophole are the key parts of current farm policy that enable corporations to collect multiple payments and overall lower the integrity of the entire farm subsidy program (Hoefner, 2010). The GAO also clearly identified ways that subsidy beneficiaries could route government payments through “non-farming entities” back to themselves (Hoefner, 2010). All of these loopholes, and many more, were left fully intact in the ruling that President Obama signed into law in early 2010, contrary to his 2008 campaign promises to end these practices. Probably the most drastic solution to the farm subsidy issues outlined here is to completely do away with the farm subsidy program and allow the farmers to set their own prices in the free market. In the early to mid-1980s, New Zealand ended all government farm subsidy programs with no phasing out of the subsidy payments (Federated Farmers of New Zealand, 2002). This was a very bold move as New Zealand is five times more dependent on farming than the U.S. economy (Edwards & DeHaven, 2003). Despite some farmer objections to the policy removal, New Zealand’s farming economy has continued to grow. Since the end of the government subsidies farm output in New Zealand has significantly increased and grows at a rate six times faster than before the subsidies were removed (Federated Farmers of New Zealand, 2002). Farmers have cut operational costs, expanded their land use, earned outside income and modified crop output depending on the state of the market (Edwards & DeHaven, 2003). The Federated Farmers of New Zealand reported that the country’s experience after ending government subsidies “thoroughly debunked the myth that the farming sector cannot prosper without government subsidies” (Federated Farmers of New Zealand, 2002).

Call to Action In conclusion, the United States government needs to take a long, hard look at the current state of farm subsidy policy. Not only can significant money be cut from the federal budget but farmers of all income levels can make more money, which is good for all of us in the long run as they will have more to put back into the economy. Not only do the subsidy plans need to be overhauled, but the government needs to make sure that they have the structure in place to enforce their own rules. I’m not suggesting that all farm subsidies be ended immediately as I personally know several farmers that depend on the various subsidy programs to help make ends meet. I am simply suggesting that things drastically need to change or we, as a country, are just going to keep digging ourselves deeper into a financial hole and not be able to pull ourselves back out of it.

Bibliography
APHA. (2007, November 6). Policy Statement Database. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from American Public Health Association: http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=1361
Brasher, P. (2011, February 15). USDA: Subsidy cap would hit 30,000. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from DesMoinesRegister.com: http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2011/02/15/usda-subsidy-cap-would-hit-30000/
Edwards, C., & DeHaven, T. (2003). Cato Handbook for Congress. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from The Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb108/hb108-30.pdf
EWG Farm Subsidy Database. (n.d.). Retrieved November 27, 2011, from Environmental Working Group: http://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=totalfarm&page=conc&regionname=theUnitedStates
Federated Farmers of New Zealand. (2002, August). Life After Subsidies. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from Federated Farmers of New Zealand: http://www.fedfarm.org.nz/f1051,130378/130378_Life_after_subsidies_-_the_New_Zealand_experience.pdf
Hoefner, F. (2010, January 6). NSAC - Obama Keeps Subsidy Loopholes. Retrieved December 3, 2011, from National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition: http://sustainableagriculture.net/press/archived-press-releases/obama-keeps-subsidy-loopholes/
Kristof, N. D. (2009, August 22). Food for the Soul. The New York Times.
Masterson, K. (2011, October 4). NPR's Food Blog. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from National Public Radio: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/10/04/141047164/farm-bill-direct-payments-to-farmers-may-dry-up-in-2012
Monke, J. (2006, September 1). CSR Reports. Retrieved 12 3, 2011, from National Council for Science and the Environment: http://www.cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/06Oct/RS21999.pdf
Monke, J. (2008, September 30). National Agriculture Law Center. Retrieved December 3, 2011, from University of Arkansas: http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL34594.pdf
Office of Management and Budget. (2011, September). Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf
Olson, R. D. (2006, June). Below-Cost Feed Crops. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from National Family Farm Coalition: http://www.nffc.net/Learn/Reports/BelowCost6_06.pdf
Swenson, D. (2011, April). Measuring the Economic Impacts of Increased Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Production in Iowa Considering Economic Demand. Retrieved December 3, 2011, from The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University: http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/pubs-and-papers/2011-04-measuring-economic-impacts-increased-fresh-fruit-and-vegetable-production-iowa-considering-metropoli.pdf
U.S. GAO. (2011, March). U.S. GAO - Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue. Retrieved December 3, 2011, from U.S. Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov/ereport/GAO-11-318SP/data_center_savings/Agriculture/Reducing_some_farm_program_payments_could_result_in_savings_from_$800_million_over_10_years_to_up_to_$5_billion_annually
USDA ERS. (2011, November 29). 2011 Farm Sector Income Forecast. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from USDA Economic Research Service: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/farmincome/nationalestimates.htm

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Farming Subsidies

...Research Suggests Farm Subsidies are the Reason Americans Pay Higher Food Prices, Higher Taxes, Ending Small-Scale Farming while Destroying our Ecosystem: Michael L Ashcraft Western Governors University Background: Over 70 years ago, The Roosevelt administration announced the onset of government farm subsidies as a temporary emergency measure to help farmers earn a certain level of income. Although there have been dramatic efficiency upgrades within the farming industry, little change has been changed made regarding how the government funds farm subsidies. The basic idea of how government subsidies function, the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars to raise farmers incomes by raising the price of certain farm commodities. This increase in price encourages farmers to produce these subsidized commodities in large amounts, while encouraging consumers to buy them in small amounts (Armey, R. K., 1990). The result of producing large amounts while purchased amounts are low creates a surplus. Once a surplus occurs the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars encouraging farmers to discontinue producing the certain commodities, essentially subsidizing farmers not to farm. This policy creates great inefficiency, under the farm law passed in 1985, the Department of Agriculture has paid dairy farmers to kill 1.6 million cows and take five-year vacations from farming. Regulations have been enforced that have led to the squandering...

Words: 2071 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Agriculture Subsidies

...The modern agricultural subsidy program in the United States began with the New Deal and the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933. With trader barriers already in place for agricultural commodities, this law gave the government the power to set minimum prices and included government stock acquisition, land idling, and schemes to cut supplies by destroying livestock (Benedict, 1953). An agricultural subsidy is a government subsidy paid to farmers and agribusinesses to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities and influence the cost and supply of commodities, such as wheat, grain, corn, milk, and soybeans (Agricultural Subsidy, 2012). The government subsidy program was originally designed to protect small family farms against loss of income due to poor crop yields, as well as create lower food prices and stabilize crop supplies. Annual yields are dependent upon factors that farmers often cannot control, such as severe weather conditions. Due to this, it’s contingent upon the government to encourage crop surplus to help guarantee against shortages. The high cost of land, planting, and storage makes it necessary for farmers to borrow and exorbitant amount of money. When the farmers can’t pay this money back because of low crop yields, they rely on these government subsidies to survive. Today’s farm operations have transformed the family farm from a small, self-contained business to a complex, technology-driven enterprise as seen in the rapidly...

Words: 1274 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Trading

...Case study (2) Agricultural Subsidies and Development For decades the rich countries of the developed world have lavished subsidies on their farmers, typically guaranteeing them a minimum price for the products they produce. The aim has been to protect farmers in the developed world from the potentially devastating effects of low commodity prices. Although they are small in numbers, farmers tend to be politically active, and winning their support is important for many politicians. The politicians often claim that their motive is to preserve a historic rural lifestyle, and they see subsidies as a way of achieving that goal. This logic has resulted in financial support estimated to exceed $300 billion a year for farmers in rich nations. The European Union, for example, has set a minimum price for butter of 3,282 euros per ton. If the world price for butter falls below that amount, the EU will make up the difference to farmers in the form of a direct payment or subsidy. In total, EU dairy farmers receive roughly $15 billion a year in subsidies to produce milk and butter, or about $2 a day for every cow in the EU—a figure that is more than the daily income of half the world’s population. According to the OECD, overall EU farmers receive approximately $134 billion a year in subsidies. The EU is not alone in this practice. In the United States, a wide range of crop and dairy farmers receive subsidies. Typical is the guarantee that U.S. cotton farmers will receive at least $0.70 for...

Words: 1625 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Agricultural Subsidy

...International Economics BEQM607 "Agricultural Subsidies & Development" Completed by: John Williams - Rosita Tran - Shrey Sharma- 11739401 Word Count: Viraj Bhatti - Introduction Agriculture accounts for 9% of world trade as is therefore not surprisingly top of the list for government policy for many countries, with agriculture industry still being the largest employer in many developing and third world countries. Currently there are many global issues regarding agricultural policies which include subsidies and tariffs, with continues debate whether they are economically beneficial or in fact detrimental to the agriculture trade market. The world is in a current face off involving developed countries such USA and EU and rising developing countries such as Brazil and India. International efforts have been made to solve issues through trade negotiations such as The Doha Round, a current round of trade negotiations among the World Trade Organization members, which have been going on since 2001 due to the complexity of the issues surrounding agricultural industry. The aim of this essay to critically analyse the effects of removing tariffs and subsidies on the average consumer and average farmer in developed countries as well as how it will effect developing countries. Removing Tariffs and Subsidies “The current subsidies distort incentives for the global trade of agricultural commodities in which other countries may have a comparative advantage. Allowing...

Words: 2886 - Pages: 12

Free Essay

Agriculture Subsidies

...Dope sheet- agricultural subsidies in India 1) What is subsidy? Subsidies are grants given to a specified public to get a desired action from their side, for instance, when government is feeling that the yield per hectare is low which can be increased by using fertilizers, than government gives fertilizers subsidies so that small farmers can purchase the fertilizer. This means that subsidy is changing the price exogenously to alter the demand and supply figures. Most controversial classes of subsidies across the world are fuel subsidies and agricultural subsidies and today we are discussing agricultural subsidies. 2) What are the latest news stories about subsidies? There is omnipresence of this word subsidy. Recently some big stories came out of this word. Some 12 stories came in month of October itself. For example a) Government is worried because they think their subsidy bill will increase this time because of good monsoons. b) Raghuram rajan, chief advisor to prime minister says we are mistargeting subsidies. c) Manpreet sing from shrimoni akali dal (sad) was thrown out of his finance portfolio because he wanted to do away with power subsidies of 3000 crore. Punjab Government is in debt of almost 150000 crore rupees. 3) Why we need subsidy, what are the benefits of subsidy as a policy? a) Inducing higher consumption/ production b) Offsetting market imperfections including internalisation of externalities c) Achievement of social policy objectives including redistribution...

Words: 3440 - Pages: 14

Free Essay

The Benefit of Subsidy to a Common Naijerian

...The effects of subsidies The opportunity cost of subsidies People who defend subsidies for particular sectors often highlight the goods or services that have been produced, or the new jobs created. What they do not normally acknowledge is that the benefits to society of that money, if it had been spent otherwise, or left in the pockets of taxpayers, might have been even greater. Economists refer to the value of an expenditure in its highest alternative use as its "opportunity cost." The concept of opportunity cost is reasonably intuitive. At the household level, if a person spends $100 on a night on the town, that $100 is no longer available to buy necessities, like food. Similarly, if a government spends $100,000 on a bridge that few people will use, that money is not available to be spent on education, or health care, or any other government priority. Because of taxes and other feedback mechanism in an economy, the analogy between the government and a household is not perfect. But in the presence of a budget constraint, all spending decisions, at the margin, imply trade-offs. Ideally, a government would strive to structure its expenditures so as to achieve a return to society that is roughly similar for each dollar spent. Subsidies can easily upset that balance. Consider a hydro-electric project that also provides water to irrigate adjacent farmland. A cubic metre of water from its reservoir has a high value when it passes through turbines and generates electricity...

Words: 1845 - Pages: 8

Free Essay

Economic Priciples for Managers

...of United States (U.S.) trade policy is the program of subsidies the United States provides its farmers. Trade partners object to U.S. farm subsidies, saying they unfairly block out foreign competition and this has been one of the primary sticking points during trade negotiations. The counterargument holds that U.S. farm subsidies are necessary to prop up the U.S. farm industry, particularly given the role that has been assigned to corn-based ethanol in the United States energy security plan. This brings us to the issue at hand; do United States farming subsidies need to continue, or should they be eliminated? This work will attempt to clarify why both sides of the argument feel they are correct and it will also attempt to show that repairing or fixing farming subsidies, not completely eliminating the program is in our best interest as a country. Method Most of the research that was unearthed on this topic came from the professionals in the field. Among the research found are debates from the CATO institute, website articles from the National Center for Policy Analysis, and information from the Heritage Foundation. Findings and Observations As it is often argued, governments are going to be involved in agriculture and a country’s food supply. As is often the case, if governments are involved, you as a consumer want them to err on the side of more production, not less. Estimates of the future cost of subsidies are, exactly just that, estimates. However, given the...

Words: 2113 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Hello

...contains the necessary critical distance. Note: These essays are for revision purposes giving suggestions for how to answer questions. Don’t try to pass them off as your own work. AS Micro Essays 1.Evaluate the case for and against governments intervening to try to stabilise the price of copper, for example, through setting up a buffer stock scheme. 2.Evaluate advantages and disadvantages of various methods of government intervention to correct market failure arising from aircraft emissions. 3. Discuss the likely effects on the retail market for coffee if there is a large increase in city centre rents. 4.In the UK, students face increasing tuition fees. Discuss the benefits and costs to society of abolishing all tuition fees. 5.Discuss three policies to reduce the level of cigarette smoking amongst under 21s. 6.Discuss the extent to which governments should subsidise companies who are developing cars which run on clean fuels such as hydrogen? 7.Discuss whether the government is mistaken to worry about monopoly power? 8.Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the government intervening in agricultural markets? 9.Discuss the effects on UK business of a rise in fuel prices. 10. Discuss whether the government should end free health care for people and make them take out private health care insurance like in the US? 11. Discuss the role that pollution permits could play in reducing global warming 12. Discuss the case for implementing a congestion...

Words: 8844 - Pages: 36

Premium Essay

The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Developing Countries

...The effects of trade liberalization in agriculture, particularly of developing countries, have become an important part of major studies in recent years after a decade of failed or unsafisfactory WTO negotiations. The trade talks launched at Doha, Qatar, in November of 2001, are considered to be the first of nine negotiating rounds to address the “needs and the interests” of developing countries (Elliott, 2007, p. 1). There have been many attempts to reach an agreement between countries on agricultural liberalization. The failure to reacha solution still persists, however, as was seen at the “Battle in Seattle”, in November of 1999 where strong anti-WTO sentiment took to the streets in mass protests. (Fabiosa, 2008, p. 1). This anti-trade stance asks the fundamental question whether agricultural trade liberalization is beneficial to developing countries or not. The growth of globalization creates interdependence among countries and increases the capacity of the economy of the countries to engage in international trade. Trade liberalization in agriculture has significant benefits to individuals who devote their lives to agriculture, mainly small farmers from developing countries. This idea would also promote economic growth in these countries. In order to make trade liberalization in agriculture an ideal concept, there are still a few hurdles that need to be cleared, such as granting developing nations funds to meet environmental...

Words: 2118 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Causes Of Factory Drilling

...consumer demand in the United States each year, and according to the ASPCA, 99% of these animals are raised on factory farms. Factory farming is one of the main causes of climate change, water pollution, and leads to widespread health problems leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths per year. The regulations that are being enacted do not do enough. Public opinion is not on factory farming’s side, and despite rapid production and demand for meat and dairy products, the average farmer is...

Words: 1668 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Text

...As arshad already explainied how the RTA impacted job and wasges of the meixco ppl during dat era it shows that globalization does effect the agricultuy and manufacturing workers 1) Subisidies of corn sector In 2000, U.S. government subsidies to the corn sector totaled $10.1 billion. These subsidies have led to charges of dumping, which jeopardizes Mexican farms and the country's food self-sufficiency. 2) Globalization and employment Nafta did deliver as expected: Exports and foreign direct investment tripled from the early 1990s as Mexico became a leading supplier of cars, electronics and a broad variety of industrial parts to the United States. Productivity in Mexican manufacturing rose 80 percent. But annual economic growth averaged only 1.6 percent per capita between 1992 and 2007 — low even by Mexican standards until the 1980s. American jobs did move south, particularly into the export sector. The growth in services — new supermarkets, banks, tourism — also created jobs. But overall, Mexico was unable to create enough jobs to make up for all the jobs lost because of competition from imports, particularly purchases of subsidized grains from the United States. The oversupply of labor, along with government policies that succeeded in keeping wages low, have led to a slight increase in the gap between average wages in the United States and Mexico — precisely the opposite of what Nafta was expected to do. * Unfair competition among import and domestic market ...

Words: 999 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Ethanol

...global warming looming in the minds of many expert scientists as the world’s greatest environmental challenge, a common belief is that it is more important than ever that the US develop sensible and far-sighted energy policy. Politicians’ claims aside, the politics of energy policy are rarely about what is best “for the country.” When government sets energy policy, some people gain, and others may lose. The politics of energy policy, then, are not simply, or even generally, about how to make the nation as a whole better off. Rather, the politics of energy policy are very much about interested political groups struggling against one another. This type of “special interest” politics is nothing new, and not unique to energy policy. Nevertheless, it is widely held among average Americans that the political activities of special interest politics are often bad for the nation as a whole. Because public information is a democracy’s best weapon against harmful special-interest politics, in this chapter we hope to accomplish three goals: 1) to present an outline of the “nuts and bolts” of U.S. ethanol policy; 2) to use economic analysis to examine the effects of ethanol policy, presenting arguments to cut through much of the political rhetoric about which groups win and which lose from it; and 3) to discuss the politics that drive ethanol policy for clearer view of just why we see the policies implemented that we do. The Issue at Hand: Who Really Benefits from and Who Really Pays for US Ethanol...

Words: 14434 - Pages: 58

Premium Essay

Kscnkslv

...Economic Outlook, Prospects, and Policy Challenges 01 CHAPTER This year’s Economic Survey comes at a time of unusual volatility in the international economic environment. Markets have begun to swing on fears that the global recovery may be faltering, while risks of extreme events are rising. Amidst this gloomy landscape, India stands out as a haven of stability and an outpost of opportunity. Its macro-economy is stable, founded on the government’s commitment to fiscal consolidation and low inflation. Its economic growth is amongst the highest in the world, helped by a reorientation of government spending toward needed public infrastructure. These achievements are remarkable not least because they have been accomplished in the face of global headwinds and a second successive season of poor rainfall. The task now is to sustain them in an even more difficult global environment. This will require careful economic management. As regards monetary and liquidity policy, the benign outlook for inflation, widening output gaps, the uncertainty about the growth outlook and the over-indebtedness of the corporate sector all imply that there is room for easing. Fiscal consolidation continues to be vital, and will need to maintain credibility and reduce debt, in an uncertain global environment, while sustaining growth. On the government’s “reformto-transform” agenda, a series of measures, each incremental but collectively meaningful have been enacted. There have also...

Words: 64752 - Pages: 260

Premium Essay

World Trade Organisation

...WTO AND INDIAN ECONOMY (AGRICULTURAL IMPLICATIONS) BY: RAYNAH FERNANDES 13 SRUSHTI GANGAN 14 NEHA GAONKAR 15 INDEX 1. WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION  GATT  Principles of WTO  Objectives & Function 2. INDIA & WTO 3. INDIAN ECONOMY 4. INDIAN AGRICULTURE  Agricultural Trade  Agricultural Support Policies  Importance Of Indian Agriculture 5. AGREEMENT ON AGRICULTURE  The Three Boxes: Green, Amber and Blue  Trend In Pattern Of Consumption  Implication Of Agreement : Short Term and Long Term 6. WTO & INDIAN AGRICULTURE  India’s Commitment  India’s Agricultural Trade Under WTO Regime 7. A STUDY & ITS FINDINGS 8. SUGGESTIONS 9. BIBLIOGRPHY ACKNOWLEGEMENT We would like to acknowledge and express our sincerest gratitude for the efforts and timely guidance of our professor Mrs. Neelam Shetty of Managerial Economics for providing us the opportunity to study the impact of WTO agreements on the Indian economy especially focused on the agricultural sector. We would also like to thanks and express our gratitude towards professor Mr. Agnelo Menezes of economics from the Bachelors of Arts faculty and his student from XRCVC Master Prashant Lindayat. Each and every team member gave in his best to make sure that this report has all the necessary inputs and is completed on time. We definitely had a knowledgeful and enriching experience. WORLD TRADE...

Words: 12777 - Pages: 52

Free Essay

Literature Review on Autism.Doc

...studies of fertilizer subsidy without first making an examination of the structure and dynamics of subsidy. This may lead to misleading focus and to seeking solutions generally in adjustment of administered prices. Substantial gains in efficiency can be realized by looking into structural questions of subsidy. The case of Bangladesh provides an example of how a proper procedure of accounting can shift the onus of correcting numerous distortions that arise from current practices, from farmers to industries. The case study also shows that farmers receive less subsidy than usually claimed and the hidden subsidy to industries is passed on to farmers. The Bangladesh case may represent developing countries in a general manner. Introduction: In the early 1970s, Bangladesh pursued a highly restrictive trade and exchange rate policy characterized by import regulations, high import tariffs, export taxes, pervasive quantitative restrictions, and an overvalued exchange rate, similar to policies of the 1960s when it was part of united Pakistan. The policy regime in the 1970s was especially restrictive for the agricultural sector.. Major reforms in markets for fertilizer and irrigation equipment markets were begun during the late 1970s (Appendix Table A8). Under the New Marketing System established in 1978, private trade in fertilizer was liberalized, leading to a large expansion in the number of wholesalers and retailers operating in the fertilizer market. The government had a monopoly on...

Words: 2531 - Pages: 11