I believe in free markets and small government, and I’m also against Washington corruption.
Which is why I want to abolish the Department of Agriculture.
And I suspect all sensible people will agree after reading excerpts from these three articles.
We’ll start with Damon Cline, who produced a searing indictment of farm welfare for the Augusta Chronicle.
Alexis de Tocqueville posited in the 19th century that America’s undoing would occur once “politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.” That’s exactly what the Farm Bill allows politicians to do – loot the treasury on behalf of the lobbyists, special interest groups and voting blocs who keep them fat and happy in Washington Wonderland. …The bill continues a legacy of waste that started 60 years ago when campaign contribution-sniffing politicians realized they could make the Great Depression’s temporary, emergency measures permanent. At $956 billion – a figure which outporks the infamous 2009 “stimulus” package by $200 billion – the Farm Bill is four-fifths food stamps and one-fifth agribusiness subsidies. It’s a swindle easily marketed to the masses. …Republicans from conservative farm districts forged an unholy alliance with and Democrats from liberal-leaning urban ones to funnel goodies to their core constituencies with minimal bickering. …American agriculture is dominated by sophisticated family corporate enterprises and Fortune 500 companies such as Archer Daniels Midland, Tyson Foods and Pilgrims Pride Corp. …Net profits were $131 billion last year, and the average farmer’s household income ($104,525 last year) far exceeds the U.S. average. …[A farmer] can earn up to $900,000 per year and still qualify for benefits that guarantee his revenues never fall below 86 percent of his previous years’ peak earnings. On top of that, taxpayers pay 62 percent of his business-insurance premiums. …The most heavily subsidized crops – corn, cotton, wheat, soybeans and rice – have their own lobby groups, as do many non-subsidized commodities, whose producers hope to get rolled into future farm bills (as U.S. catfish and maple syrup producers managed to do this year).
Ugh. What a disgusting scam.
Now let’s look at two different examples of how federal intervention produces awful results.
The first is from Daniel Payne’s column in The Federalist. He writes about how a discrimination case became an excuse to loot taxpayers.
The USDA is blessed with an ample amount of time and a great deal of money, which means it must forever be inventing new ways to spend the billions and billions of dollars allocated to it every year… the department has a history of both vicious incompetence, remorseless fraud and sulky hostility… The incompetence and fraud are both well-documented; perhaps the greatest combination of the two can be found in the Pigford v. Glickman case. Pigford was a class action lawsuit leveled against the USDA by black farmers who claimed they had been discriminated against while seeking federal loans from the department; the lawsuit quickly ballooned to an enormous number of claimants seeking redress for racial discrimination, which, as the New York Times reported, resulted in USDA employees finding reams of suspicious claims, from nursery-school-age children and pockets of urban dwellers, sometimes in the same handwriting with nearly identical accounts of discrimination.These are not “suspicious” claims but openly false and fraudulent ones, as any capable, mildly-intelligent adult can immediately discern. …The USDA responded to these grim revelations by cheerfully going along with the terms of the settlement: in one instance, they paid out nearly $100 million to sixteen zip codes in which “the number of successful claimants exceeded the total number of farms operated by people of any race;” in one town in North Carolina, “the number of people paid was nearly four times the total number of farms.” Was there no sensible, principled person within the entire Department willing to put an end to such absurdity? Was there anybody sitting around that might have mounted some kind of aggressive campaign to combat such naked deceit? Don’t count on it. This is the same bureaucracy, after all, that has paid out tens of millions of dollars to dead farmers. Last year alone the department’s whiz kids made over $6 billion in improper payments. Nearly 66% of improper food stamp payments were “agency-caused.”
And here’s Jim Bovard, writing in the Wall Street Journal about America’s Soviet-style central planning rules for raisins.
Under current law, the 1930s-era federally authorized Raisin Administrative Committee can commandeer up to half of a farmer’s harvest as a “reserve”—to purportedly stabilize markets and prevent gluts. …The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 authorized the secretary of Agriculture to appoint farmer-dominated committees to control production. The subsequent crop marketing orders were based on the New Deal philosophy of “managed abundance”—prosperity through “universal monopoly and universal scarcity.” …But the parity index was concocted by government agricultural economists in the 1920s to justify federal aid to farmers. “Parity” was based on a set ratio of farm prices to nonfarm prices, in correlation with the ratio that prevailed in 1910-14, a boom time for farmers. Because production costs for both farm and nonfarm goods radically changed, it never made any economic sense to rely on “parity” but it was a popular political ploy. …the raisin committee’s sweeping powers have failed to prevent vast swings in prices farmers receive. Many California farmers have shifted their land to other crops; the acreage devoted to raisin production has plunged since 2000. …economic illiteracy can vest boundless power in bureaucracies.
In his column, Jim also discusses a legal challenge to this insane system, so maybe there’s a glimmer of hope that this corrupt and inefficient system could be eliminated, or at least curtailed.
For what it’s worth, I still think the Department of Housing and Urban Development should be the first big bureaucracy in DC to be eliminated. But I sure won’t cry if the Department of Agriculture winds up on the chopping block first.
As P.J. O’Rourke famously advised, “Drag the thing behind the barn and kill it with an ax.”
P.S. I’ve shared many examples of anti-libertarian humor (several links available here), in part because I appreciate clever jokes and in part because I think libertarians should be self-confident about the ideas of liberty.
That being said, I definitely like to share examples of pro-libertarian humor, such as Libertarian Jesus.
And here’s the latest item for my collection.
Maybe not as good as the libertarian version of a sex fantasy, but still quite amusing.
[…] is a reminder that nitwit bureaucrats (I assume at the Department of Agriculture) want us to believe processed flour is better for us than […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] shrink the federal government. No Department of Education., No welfare state. No Department of Agriculture. No redistribution. No Department of Housing and Urban […]
[…] would dramatically shrink the federal government. No Department of Education., No welfare state. No Department of Agriculture. No redistribution. No Department of Housing and Urban […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] (Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation, […]
[…] (Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation, […]
[…] (it’s better than redistribution outlays, and also better than money that goes for the Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, […]
[…] (it’s better than redistribution outlays, and also better than money that goes for the Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, […]
Si eres un ido aficionado de los futbolines como y siempre has querido tener uno, ya no hay excusa. Desde que descubri esta web pude encontrar el ideal para mi piso, y eso que no es muy grande
[…] is that many parts of the federal government that shouldn’t exist (Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, etc) get much of their […]
[…] (Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation, etc) doesn’t […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] Department of Agriculture should be abolished. Yesterday, if […]
[…] same is true for the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, and many other boxes on the federal […]
[…] I usually cite the Department of Housing and Urban Development as an example, but the Department of Agriculture also should be terminated. […]
[…] en los Departamentos de Transporte, Vivienda y Desarrollo Urbano, Educación, Energía y Agricultura es cero. ¿Por qué? Porque esas burocracias no deberían […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because those bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because they bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because they bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] at the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture is zero. Why? Because they bureaucracies shouldn’t […]
[…] The entire Department of Agriculture should be abolished. Yesterday, if possible. […]
[…] Je réalise que c'est du pur fantasme, mais ne serait-ce pas agréable d'avoir l'approche inverse? Qu'en est-il de l'élimination simultanée des barrières commerciales et de la suppression du ministère de l'Agriculture ? […]
[…] I realize this is pure fantasy, but wouldn’t it be nice to have the reverse approach? How about we simultaneously eliminate trade barriers and get rid of the Department of Agriculture? […]
[…] I realize this is pure fantasy, but wouldn’t it be nice to have the reverse approach? How about we simultaneously eliminate trade barriers and get rid of the Department of Agriculture? […]
[…] I realize this is pure fantasy, but wouldn’t it be nice to have the reverse approach? How about we simultaneously eliminate trade barriers and get rid of the Department of Agriculture? […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] O’Rourke came up with the only appropriate solution to this […]
[…] are many reasons to shut down the Department of Agriculture. But it’s hard to imagine a bigger reason than […]
[…] I’ve never been a huge fan of this report because it is too limited on the spending side. You won’t find fleshed-out options to shut down departments, for instance, which is unfortunate given the target-rich environment (including Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture). […]
[…] exist (such as Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture), and then we can have a fun discussion of whether the private sector can take over things like […]
[…] Let’s close with some additional bad news. What’s written above relates to the GOP’s failure to control “discretionary” spending. That’s the part of the budgetthat funds the Pentagon, as well as providing most of the outlays for departments that shouldn’t even exist (such as Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture). […]
[…] Let’s close with some additional bad news. What’s written above relates to the GOP’s failure to control “discretionary” spending. That’s the part of the budget that funds the Pentagon, as well as providing most of the outlays for departments that shouldn’t even exist (such as Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, and Agriculture). […]
[…] the country, which has a very significant agricultural sector, decided to eliminate all subsidies. I fantasize about similar reforms in the United […]
[…] the country, which has a very significant agricultural sector, decided to eliminate all subsidies. I fantasize about similar reforms in the United […]
[…] What about shutting down the Department of Education? Or the Department of Energy? How about the Department of Agriculture, or Department of […]
[…] shuttered. And let’s add the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, and Department of Agriculture just for the fun of […]
[…] The Department of Agriculture […]
[…] that was the point I tried to make it the interview. I don’t care whether the Department of Agriculture or Department of Education is filled with official bureaucrats or shadow bureaucrats. What I do […]
[…] far too much power and is involved in many areas that either belong in the private sector (Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department of Housing and Urban Development, etc) or should be handled by […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] O’Rourke came up with the only appropriate solution to this […]
[…] Here’s a video from Learn Liberty that explains how “concentrated benefits” and “dispersed costs” produce bad outcomes (and if you have any doubts that this is true, just think about the Export-Import Bank or farm subsidies). […]
[…] we have lots of bureaucracies that shouldn’t exist, such as HUD, Education, Transportation, Agriculture, etc. So that’s true as […]
[…] the squalid Department of Agriculture was elevated to the Cabinet during his […]
[…] the squalid Department of Agriculture was elevated to the Cabinet during his […]
[…] P.S. I will get really excited if a candidate goes to Iowa and explains that we should get rid of the entire Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] And I’ve also pontificated on the destructive and foolish subsidies dispensed by the execrable Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] And I’ve also pontificated on the destructive and foolish subsidies dispensed by the execrable Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] $18 Trillion debt, is cheap. But the fact is that its $149 Billion spent on what is unquestionably the most useless Department in the Cabinet. If the Republicans are serious about cutting the budget and lowering the debt then killing this […]
[…] So now you’ll understand why the Department of Agriculture deserves to be eliminated. […]
[…] it means shutting down the entire Department of […]
[…] Odious agriculture subsidies also can be purchased, even though none of the loot winds up in the pockets of Tennesseans. […]
[…] that they work for departments that shouldn’t exist (such as HUD, Education, Transportation, Agriculture, etc) and/or they are overcompensated relative to workers in the productive sector of the […]
[…] of resources), then entire federal departments such as HUD, Education, Transportation, Agriculture, etc, should be classified as waste, fraud, and […]
[…] Washington to finally get the federal government out of areas such astransportation (and housing, agriculture, education, etc) where it doesn’t […]
[…] Washington to finally get the federal government out of areas such as transportation (and housing, agriculture, education, etc) where it doesn’t […]
[…] Washington to finally get the federal government out of areas such as transportation (and housing, agriculture, education, etc) where it doesn’t […]
[…] Even though the two proposals satisfy my Golden Rule, that’s simply a minimum threshold. In reality, there’s far too much spending in both plans, and neither Chairman proposes to get rid of a single Department. Not HUD, not Education, notTransportation, and not Agriculture. […]
[…] for domestic programs, which is far too much since we should be abolishing departments such as HUD, Agriculture, Transportation, Education, […]
[…] it include agriculture subsidies, which provide unearned goodies for big agribusiness firms? […]
[…] it include agriculture subsidies, which provide unearned goodies for big agribusiness firms? […]
[…] Even though the two proposals satisfy my Golden Rule, that’s simply a minimum threshold. In reality, there’s far too much spending in both plans, and neither Chairman proposes to get rid of a single Department. Not HUD, not Education, not Transportation, and not Agriculture. […]
[…] Even though the two proposals satisfy my Golden Rule, that’s simply a minimum threshold. In reality, there’s far too much spending in both plans, and neither Chairman proposes to get rid of a single Department. Not HUD, not Education, not Transportation, and not Agriculture. […]
[…] Even though the two proposals satisfy my Golden Rule, that’s simply a minimum threshold. In reality, there’s far too much spending in both plans, and neither Chairman proposes to get rid of a single Department. Not HUD, not Education, not Transportation, and not Agriculture. […]
I was a USDA employee for 35 years….& I agree that the Department has no real value anymore…the very few (and I mean really very few) functions that could be justified based on their economic return to the taxpayers, could be easily and much less costly incorporated into another agency…. I was repeatedly told that my job was “NOT to save time or money…just to do as I was told”….and actually had a democratic congressman insist I be fired because I was NOT spending enough of the money he had worked so hard to get for the USDA to spend on the programs (I found of no value or need) in the state….also, I and most other employees were directed to incorporate “climate change/global warming” aspects into every program or proposal (because it would never be questioned budget people, but was needed to build funding and justify more employees and programs. I made conservative employees like myself very sick to see the corruption, waste, fraud & abuse…whistle blowers? Forget it…you would quickly get demoted or find your position abolished…to be filled by a cool aid drinker, with different position title…..that was not the way things were in th 70’s & 80sor in any significant amount, 25-30 years earlier….
[…] This re-confirms in my mind why we need to get rid of the Department of Agriculture. And it’s yet another piece of evidence that FDR was either incompetent of malicious on […]
[…] This re-confirms in my mind why we need to get rid of the Department of Agriculture. And it’s yet another piece of evidence that FDR was either incompetent of malicious on […]
[…] you also include monies that are squandered, then the amount of waste includes every penny at the Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of […]
[…] you also include monies that are squandered, then the amount of waste includes every penny at the Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of […]
[…] Shut down the Department of Agriculture. […]
[…] And I could cite lots of other examples on issues such as the minimum wage, health care, housing, and agriculture. […]
[…] And I could cite lots of other examples on issues such as the minimum wage, health care, housing, and agriculture. […]
I am all for ending all subsidies for farmers, especially the money that goes to subsidize crop insurance, and I’m a farmer. I am curious, even after it is pointed out that the vast majority of Department of Agriculture monies goes towards food stamp type programs why the emphasis is on the much smaller percentage that goes to farmers? It is often said it farm country they should start calling the Farm Bill the Food Assistance Bill since that is what it primarily is. Conservative Republicans did succeed last year at separating the farm portion of the bill from the food stamp part. But that approach wasn’t going to get anything passed so we went back to the old setup, where we put something in the bill for everyone to get them to vote for it.
since they are buying sub-machine guns… and forming their own departmental army… I doubt the bureaucrats at the USDA are planning on going quietly….
“…Net profits were $131 billion last year, and the average farmer’s household income ($104,525 last year) far exceeds the U.S. average. …[A farmer] can earn up to $900,000 per year…”
I don’t know ANY farmers that make this much money! Too bad there aren’t any actual sources for this skewed data.
[…] The Department of Agriculture Deserves the Death Penalty […]
[…] The Department of Agriculture Deserves the Death Penalty | International Liberty. […]
The “Basic Income” commentary in this context = “Hey, Mitchell’s found an example of a terrible government program and terrible behavior of its participants. Mine’s merely awful. And it is predicted to plunder a tad less. So, mine’s an improvement and should be implemented. See?” This is apparently because, “No one wants to see citizens below the poverty level . . .. ” and reasons; so therefore it’s a good idea.
Another case for a Basic Income. Support citizens, not the companies or industries they work for or the bureaucrats that disperse the funds.
No one wants to see citizens below the poverty level, but businesses that cannot make it in the free free-market must be allowed to fail.
The Basic Income must not approach the +200% levels of current welfare programs. However, 100% of poverty level, support that cannot be lost by earning income would be a far more reasonable target. [States would be free to pay for and distribute additional welfare support.]
Closing the USDA would be almost half the cost at $956 billion. Since the Basic Income would include funds for modest healthcare, healthcare support programs could be reduced also.
“USDA Requests .40 Semi-Automatic Weapons”
“Submachine guns, .40 Cal. S&W, ambidextrous safety, semi-automatic or 2 shot bursts”
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/usda-requests-40-semi-automatic-weapons
Reblogged this on Aquilon's Eyrie and commented:
This article quotes some of the many abuses which go on in the Department of Agriculture.