Issue: Energy: Ethanol?

[ratsbew]

I am from Iowa and grew up on a farm, my Dad still farms (Corn, Soybeans, Wheat) and has a voting share of a local ethanol plant. Does anybody know Ron Paul's position on Farming and ethanol, particularly government subsidies? Most farmers tend to be Republicans (even though the Democrats' social programs tend to benefit farmers more), and I think that if we try to speak to Iowa farmers we could make a HUGE dent in the Iowa primaries.

[Korey Kaczynski]

He' against subsidaries.

[ratsbew]

He' against subsidaries.
Well, he can pretty much count out every farmer in the nation.

[winston_blade]

Well, he can pretty much count out every farmer in the nation.

They would have much lower taxes, so that would account for the money that they wouldn't get for the government.

[Melchior]

He is indeed against subsidies, and ~ Ron Paul on Environment (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Environment.htm)

[Exponent]

This YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HdmcZrDKyQ) with Farm Food Voices might shed some light on the matter.

[jon_perez]

From the purist classical liberal economics point of view, subsidies would certainly be out of the question.

However, I believe that all over the world, people realize that agriculture is one of the few sectors of the economy which cannot function properly without subsidies. History has proven this again and again in many different contexts.

I think it is best to get Ron Paul's own view on such an important matter.

I don't believe that being principled necessarily always mean having to be a purist.

[mdh]

Erm... if agriculture can't function without subsidies, maybe there're too many farms? I mean, if I start a company and make 1,000,000 of a product that only 100,000 people want to buy, do I have the right to expect that the government buys the remaining inventory from me?

[Exponent]

This Google search on Ron Paul's Congress site (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.house.gov%2Fpaul%2F+%28f arm+OR+farms+OR+OR+farmer+OR+farmers%29+-%22press+releases%22&btnG=Search) might yield some articles or speeches that shed some light on this.

[Brandybuck]

Farm subsidies are corporate welfare. When you look at the subsidized crops, Soy, Corn, Wheat, etc., they are all dominated by huge corporations like ADM. The family and small business farm have taken up other crops that don't get subsidies. In fact, one could make a very good case that farm subsidies are the major factor in the destruction of the traditional family farm.

[mdh]

Farm subsidies are corporate welfare. When you look at the subsidized crops, Soy, Corn, Wheat, etc., they are all dominated by huge corporations like ADM. The family and small business farm have taken up other crops that don't get subsidies. In fact, one could make a very good case that farm subsidies are the major factor in the destruction of the traditional family farm.

A lot of smaller non-corporate farms seem to have gone to organic or 'sustainable ag' models, which are proving pretty profitable, since... like I said before, people are willing to pay more for quality. Not sure if these folks get much in the way of subsidies if at all??

[jon_perez]

Erm... if agriculture can't function without subsidies, maybe there're too many farms? I mean, if I start a company and make 1,000,000 of a product that only 100,000 people want to buy, do I have the right to expect that the government buys the remaining inventory from me?I believe agriculture is subsidized in just about every industrialized country in the world today. There are probably good reasons for this and I think it would help a lot to listen to farmers who support subsidies why they think these are necessary.

[mdh]

Just because everybody's doing it, doesn't make it right. If someone really has something to say about why they think they deserve free money from me by way of the taxes I pay, I'm willing to hear them out, but I doubt there's anything of substance that isn't defeated by the same arguments I've made time and time again against any form of income/wealth redistribution efforts.

[Gee]

Yeah, its well-known that American produces a huge excess of food, and that our government-subsidized food exports destroy competition in any nation that can import them without tariffs.

[megiddo]

Government subsidies necessarily increase the price of food.

Here's how.

Let's say that the true "market price" of a tomato is $2.00.

We now subsidize a farmer to the tune of $1.00 per tomato; the price at market decreases, perhaps to $1.35. But where did that $1.00 subsidy come from? You! You paid taxes. More importantly, you have to also cover the cost of the tax collector, and regulator, which may be $0.05 per tomato. So now, the total cost of the tomato is $2.40. This sucks.

But more importantly, the subsidies have given the farmer a poor indicator of market forces. Let's say there's no subsidy on corn (what a joke that is ...). Now the farmer produces excess tomatoes, which deprives the market of corn. This will drive up the unsubsidized price of corn, which also increases your cost.

It gets even worse as a result of foreign policy. Our government buys and gives away tons of our produce every year. Other governments simply buy it. What this means is, if China buys our corn at a reduced price (because of subsidies), the American taxpayer footed the bill for China!

Something like %4 of Americans are farmers. Something like 50% of Americans vote. I don't have specific numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that averages apply evenly here. Farming would be better off without subsidies, but individual farmers would not. So's the strokes. I own a small parts business. Nobody would lament in congress if I lost my business, or you lost your job.

Consider, further, the case of America being the sole unsubsidized farming nation. Our farmers would quickly become the most efficient in the world (by necessity). Moreover, those products that we don't produce enough of, we can import. And here's the best part. Let's say China taxes its business sector to subsidize Chinese soy farmers so they can export to the US. That's great! Now I'm paying a lower cost for soy because Chinese businessmen are footing the bill!

[beermotor]

From the purist classical liberal economics point of view, subsidies would certainly be out of the question.

However, I believe that all over the world, people realize that agriculture is one of the few sectors of the economy which cannot function properly without subsidies. History has proven this again and again in many different contexts.

I think it is best to get Ron Paul's own view on such an important matter.

I don't believe that being principled necessarily always mean having to be a purist.

No no no no NO... history hasn't proven anything; the Supreme Court made a series of horrible decisions to support the New Deal, which it was in line to destroy/defeat. Consequently, 80 years of expanding government power and look at the results ...

are farmers better off? Not hardly. Are we better off? Not hardly. Look at what subsidies for ethanol production do the food stocks, for crying out loud!

[mdh]

Something like 50% of Americans vote.

In the 2006 elections, 39% of registered voters turned out to the polls. I don't have statistics on what percentage of the population can legally vote, or what percentage of those who can are not registered.

So the real number of people who voted seems to be more along the lines of 10% of legal US citizens, nowhere near 50%, not even 50% of those who are registered to vote.

[NewEnd]

Ethanol Sucks. It is a waste of taxpayer money. It HURTS the environment, and our energy stock.


http://money.cnn.com/2007/03/08/real_estate/ethanol_fuels_rural_renaissance/index.htm

"I wish ethanol production was a boon to the nation and the environment; it is not," he says. Even if every grain of corn went into ethanol production, it would still not make the United States oil independent, he notes.

"Look at it on a per-gallon basis," says Pimentel. "Our latest study indicates it takes 40 percent more fossil fuel energy to produce ethanol than it creates." Fossil fuels run farm and factory machinery, provide heat for the factories and transport ethanol to distant markets.

Pimentel says that corn, the No. 1 ethanol crop in the United States, requires more herbicides and insecticides to grow, needs large amounts of fertilizer and is responsible for more soil erosion than any other U.S. crop.

Furthermore, many of the areas benefiting most from ethanol production face water shortages; it takes 1,700 gallons of water to produce a gallon of ethanol, according to Pimentel.

==========================

Ron Paul won by 20% in his district, yet does not vote for pork. When asked how does he do it, he said he explains to people why it is bad for America.

[NewEnd]

there is a video, of ron Paul, in one of these series, where he addresses the issue:
I cant find the link, but he pretty much says the same thing.

It was real recent, at a new hampshire town meeting, with audience, email, and call-in questions.

If I run across it again, I'll post a link here.

[mdh]

The federal government has CNG vehicles in service, and most agencies around DC have some of them. They run great. The one I've had the oppurtunity to use was a Ford F150 and was no different from any unleaded gas F150 I've been in. CNG's a great alternative for vehicle fueling.

[Craig_R]

Well, he can pretty much count out every farmer in the nation.

his district is mostly farms, so that discounts that theory

[Gee]

I think the current energy ratio of corn ethanol is around 1.3. Then there is the fact that internal combustion engines are only around 33% effecient (a bit better for higher-compression motors that only run off alcohol, but not much better). So yeah, its pretty useless at the moment without subsidies, taking valuable farmland from other things. But I'm sure there are people looking at other crops, bioengineering, etc...

I think sugarcane is around 330% efficient, but I don't think it can grow well in the US. Thats why Brazil runs on ethanol though, sugarcane. Biodiesel is also around that same number.

Some sources seem to claim that gasoline and diesel have an energy ratio of < 1.0... I really don't know how that could be, unless coal-supplied electricity is used heavily to refine it? Edit: Other sources seem to claim its 10:1

This stuff is pretty cool, BTW. A flexible solar energy film which is literally printed out, and is supposed to be 1/5th to 1/10th the cost of normal solar panels.
http://www.nanosolar.com/

[Captain Shays]

Well, he can pretty much count out every farmer in the nation.

My friend. The farm subsidy program has been disastrous to the family farmer. As you and your dad pretty well understand they have been based on the size of the farm right? That means that if you pay an income tax, you're actually subsidizing your own competition who just happen to be the biotech conglomerates who you buy your chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicieds from. Now, you're buying much of your genetically modified seed stock from them as well. As the family farms go belly up, many of them are bought out bythe conglomerates who then reap even larger subsidies. The result, is that our food supply is dangerously falling into the hands of a few marge conglomerates who are now multi-national in nature so this trend is seen the world over.

But maybe you guys have become dependent upon government handouts ie subsidies for your survival and now, you're looking for even more subsidies for things like ethanol.

But ethanol is a farse and its a very dangerous course to set this country on and I'll tell you why.

First of all, either you, your father, or your grandfather will have some stories to tell about the great dust bowl of the 1920's. This was brought on by a prolonged drought. its obvious that this country is and always has been subject to the whims of mother nature and her varius major storm events,floods, tornados, hurricains and droughts. Unless we have in place some national water distribution system that is capable of diverting water from flood prone areas to drought stricken areas, some unforeseen event or chain of events can distrupt not only our food supply, but our energy supply as well.
Then you have the strain that we're already seeing relative to shortages in corn due to demand for that same corn for ethanol and we're seeing food prices raise dramatically as a result and this can only be expected to get worse as we travel the ethanol course.

Side note. Ron Paul actually authored a Bill that would legalize the production of industrial Hemp. If farmers could grow Hemp there would be little need to additional fertalizers since it actually replenishes nutrients to the soil. In most parts fo the country farmers could easily get two or three crops per year since Hemp grows well in most climates. With regard to genetically modifying Hemp as opposed to genetically modifying food crops, there is no danger to the bee population, our food supply or the health of humans if something goes wrong like cross pollination to non GMO crops.

Hemp genetically modified to produce a higher oil content and a higher fiber content can dramatically off-set our dependence on foreign oil, can dramatically reduce our rate of deforestation, reduce our trade deficit to places like China (we who live in the home fo the brave and the land of the free cannot grow Hemp so we have to import it from a totalitarian communist country where they can--go figure). Then there are the millions of gallons of bioxin bleach that enter our environment every year from the paper pulp industry.
No longer would we have to pay farmers to not grow food.

Ron Paul is as sane and honest as they come on this subject and we need him to save this country. Register as a Republican and get everyone you know to do the same thing so you can vote fro him in the primaries

[Capitalism]

Erm... if agriculture can't function without subsidies, maybe there're too many farms? I mean, if I start a company and make 1,000,000 of a product that only 100,000 people want to buy, do I have the right to expect that the government buys the remaining inventory from me?

amen!

[Capitalism]

I believe agriculture is subsidized in just about every industrialized country in the world today. There are probably good reasons for this and I think it would help a lot to listen to farmers who support subsidies why they think these are necessary.

Yeah, everybody on the public dole thinks they deserve it. The reason subsidies are so popular is that the few people lucky enough to get them fight very hard to keep them. There's no organized resistance because it's mostly a waste of time. If you can fight to get $15,000 a year, it is probably worth it. It's not worth fighting too hard to save $5 or $10 a year in your own taxes, even if it's $5 or $10 for every non-farmer in the country, on average. (just a total guess on those numbers to illustrate my point.)

[drinkbleach]

The reason why Brazil is able to benefit so much from ethanol production is because sugarcane ethanol is more efficient to produce than corn based ethanol. It's just that the U.S. has a hardon for supporting big business corn industries.

[austinphish]

I hate to say it, but this is the reason I think Ron Paul is going to get thrashed in Iowa, and should just avoid the state.
I was reading this in the Economist last night:
http://www.economist.com/world/na/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=9149882

Highlights of the article include:
1.The federal government offers ethanol producers a subsidy of 51 cents per gallon

2. Corn-based ethanol is neither cheap nor especially green: it requires a lot of energy to produce. Production has been boosted by economically-questionable help from state and federal governments, including subsidies, the promotion of mixing petrol with renewable fuels and a high tariff that keeps out foreign ethanol.

3. "Iowa, in the heart of the region, already has 28 ethanol refineries, producing 1.9 billion gallons of the stuff a year, nearly a third of America's total capacity. Many new facilities and expansions of existing ones are in the works. On consecutive days in Iowa last week there were ceremonies to break ground for a new factory in Hartley and to open a completed one in Corning—where bad weather had grounded the Vanguard Squadron, the world's only 100% ethanol-powered aerobatics fleet. "