Springfield XD Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,401 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So if you believe in capitalism as opposed to say socialism you will probably agree if food prices skyrocket more farmers will enter the market to take advantage of the profits and prices will come back down and there will not be food shortages. This works in a country like America where we have plenty of farmable land.

I'm starting to see a trend, websites have been prodicting the "collapse" for years, I think it really got popular in 1999. I definitely think we should all prepare for tough times but I don't think I can keep expecting it any minute. Here's a classic example of the end of the US being predicted for 2008:
As America Collapses US Government Secret Plans Revealed | Dprogram.net
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
38,922 Posts
Supply and demand do find a balance ... Has your supply of money caught up to the increased cost of ammo, yet ?

How about food ;)

We (people) are proving that we will pay more for needed/wanted items, so why should the price go down ?

An ounce of gold buys the same thing today, as it did in 1930.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,507 Posts
Supply and demand do find a balance ... Has your supply of money caught up to the increased cost of ammo, yet ?

How about food ;)

We (people) are proving that we will pay more for needed/wanted items, so why should the price go down ?

My supply of money is not larger, but my demand for things like non-essential driving has gone way down. 5 years ago the vehicles were typically 15,000 miles a year, last year just under 8000 miles. I don't plink for fun near as much. The kid and I shoot a lot more .177 than .22lr because it's 3/8ths the cost per round. We will have more stuff in the garden this year too.

We may well be paying more for items, but we are buying a lot less items. That equals lower demand and puts pressure to reduce prices.


Unfortunately, the Obama socialist administration wants alternative fuels so the farmers will be putting more land to corn to get the subsidies. That means LESS food production not more. Farmers also use a LOT of petrochemicals in fertilizers. High price of oil = high price of fertilizer --> which means they will scrimp and probably yield less per acre. There is a calculation of expenses to yield the best economic gain per acre-> not the most food per acre.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
It doesn't matter what the farmers do, as they have what's called market delay. It takes them a few months to get their produce to market, and by time that happens the shortage that occurred from market gouging on the part of the traders will soak up all of the excess produce they can bring to market.

In other words, it will take at least an entire season to push the Inflation driven prices back down to a reasonable equilibrium. That is of course they stopped the QE measures last year, and stopped pumping raw liquidity like they have been for the past three years. Now, we are screwed until at least 2013.

This is what happens when you let idiot's get elected to the office of the President, and let him put a slightly more intelligent idiot in charge of the Federal Reserve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
If supply was instantaneous to meet demand, this would work.

Crops and livestock take time to develop and then bring to market.

Meanwhile, the layers of middlemen soak up the majority of profit (if any), as the producers are soaked by higher fuel, feed and chemical fertilizer costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,401 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
If supply was instantaneous to meet demand, this would work.

Crops and livestock take time to develop and then bring to market.

Meanwhile, the layers of middlemen soak up the majority of profit (if any), as the producers are soaked by higher fuel, feed and chemical fertilizer costs.
Of course its not instantaneous but it will correct. People will also start producing their own whether at home or in a community garden.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
837 Posts
I hope you are right, Zombie Hunter. Not to go Glenn Beck on you, but I do think there are some nefarious reasons behind the rise in prices.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
38,922 Posts
I hope you are right, Zombie Hunter. Not to go Glenn Beck on you, but I do think there are some nefarious reasons behind the rise in prices.
Transportation Costs have a more rapid impact on the price of food, than the delayed impact of production costs.
Packaging Cost also have a more rapid impact than production costs.

It's a multitude of things, but it really is about the devaluation of the dollar ... Consumer costs are the result of the dollars value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,999 Posts
That would work if we had a truly capitalist society. instead, we have the gov't sticking their fingers in all our food supplies and all the stuff that contributes to it, so it's not the farmers that are making outrageous profits off the food.

Too much gov't control is making the prices rise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
So if you believe in capitalism as opposed to say socialism you will probably agree if food prices skyrocket more farmers will enter the market to take advantage of the profits and prices will come back down and there will not be food shortages. This works in a country like America where we have plenty of farmable land.

I'm starting to see a trend, websites have been prodicting the "collapse" for years, I think it really got popular in 1999. I definitely think we should all prepare for tough times but I don't think I can keep expecting it any minute. Here's a classic example of the end of the US being predicted for 2008:
As America Collapses US Government Secret Plans Revealed | Dprogram.net

You sir are woefully ignorant of agriculture. Farmers are always "in the market", they don't exit and enter. Pretty much all productive land is being produced. As others have said, modern agriculture is HIGHLY dependant on fossil fuels. Herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers all come from and require crude oil. Fuels are used to till, plant, harvest and haul the crops. More energy is used to process and transport the crops into what you see at the grocery store.

Then there is the problem of droughts.

And alternative fuels competeting for a set number of acres.

Stored commodities are at all-time lows around the world, but the .govs are trying to keep this info quiet.

Food shortages and/or high prices could be here to stay for the foreseeable future.

But again, I could be wrong! :shock:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,401 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
You sir are woefully ignorant of agriculture. Farmers are always "in the market", they don't exit and enter.
But again, I could be wrong! :shock:
Of course fuel has a huge impact on the production and transport of our food supply you don’t have to be in the 4H Club to understand that however there is still the issue of supply and demand.
Supply: There is plenty of land in this country not under the plow, both with current farmers and with land owners who have not yet thought to use it for that purpose. This is where I would expect additional supply to come from.
Demand: The production of food by individual households has seen a huge resurgence in backyard and community gardens. I’ve watched many of my white color office colleagues turn from bragging about their carbon fiber road bikes to how well their composting set up is working. This reduces the demand on several key staples.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,507 Posts
That would work if we had a truly capitalist society. instead, we have the gov't sticking their fingers in all our food supplies and all the stuff that contributes to it, so it's not the farmers that are making outrageous profits off the food.

Too much gov't control is making the prices rise.

Yes. And too much government, makes prices rise as the cost of items sold and purchased includes paying for said government. Local, state and federal employees are way way way way bigger than every other segment. And NONE of them add spit to the GDP. In actual fact, they actively REDUCE it by adding layers of red tape and miles of flaming barbwire encrusted knot holes we have to jump through. Firing 80% of all Federal employees (excluding active duty military) would be a good start.

You sir are woefully ignorant of agriculture. Farmers are always "in the market", they don't exit and enter. Pretty much all productive land is being produced.


Stored commodities are at all-time lows around the world, but the .govs are trying to keep this info quiet.

Food shortages and/or high prices could be here to stay for the foreseeable future.

But again, I could be wrong! :shock:
In some states that is true. In our state and surrounding states, that is not accurate. There are millions of acres in CPR programs where the gov is PAYING farmers to not farm. Plus millions of acres in "sensitive" places that are not allowed to be farmed.

Farmers are NOT always "in the market" from a production standpoint. That's what they are -- producers. They may be dabbling in the market as speculators too, but their economic FUNCTION is one of producer. The production cycle is typically 12 months for many crops. Corn is only planted once per year, right? Some farmers can run multiple harvests on the same acreage, but not most. (speaking of the northern parts of our great land).

Let's imagine that the price of corn goes to $100/bushel in November --> the farmer can't do anything until spring when he can plant and pray. Right? (Excepting those farmers that have unsold corn in a silo-- which is a very small minority) So the farmers can't impact the price of corn until the next fall when the next crop is harvested. Assuming a lot more acres were turned to corn and had a good harvest.


As for the level of stored commodities and food shortages .....:shock: scary stuff. Or it would be if people had a glimpse of a clue!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Of course fuel has a huge impact on the production and transport of our food supply you don’t have to be in the 4H Club to understand that however there is still the issue of supply and demand.
Supply: There is plenty of land in this country not under the plow, both with current farmers and with land owners who have not yet thought to use it for that purpose. This is where I would expect additional supply to come from.
Demand: The production of food by individual households has seen a huge resurgence in backyard and community gardens. I’ve watched many of my white color office colleagues turn from bragging about their carbon fiber road bikes to how well their composting set up is working. This reduces the demand on several key staples.

Please share with me your source that there is plenty of land in this nation that is not "under the plow". The only land I know of not being farmed shouldn't be farmed anyway, it's either highly erodible, drought-prone, or too rocky to plant.

Backyard gardens? Meh... They may get a few servings a week, but that's all and most will quit when they find out how much work it is and how much it actually costs them for ta few mouthfuls.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
In some states that is true. In our state and surrounding states, that is not accurate. There are millions of acres in CPR programs where the gov is PAYING farmers to not farm. Plus millions of acres in "sensitive" places that are not allowed to be farmed.

Farmers are NOT always "in the market" from a production standpoint. That's what they are -- producers. They may be dabbling in the market as speculators too, but their economic FUNCTION is one of producer. The production cycle is typically 12 months for many crops. Corn is only planted once per year, right? Some farmers can run multiple harvests on the same acreage, but not most. (speaking of the northern parts of our great land).

Let's imagine that the price of corn goes to $100/bushel in November --> the farmer can't do anything until spring when he can plant and pray. Right? (Excepting those farmers that have unsold corn in a silo-- which is a very small minority) So the farmers can't impact the price of corn until the next fall when the next crop is harvested. Assuming a lot more acres were turned to corn and had a good harvest.


As for the level of stored commodities and food shortages .....:shock: scary stuff. Or it would be if people had a glimpse of a clue!

Most land that isn't farmed nowadays probably shouldn't be farmed. It is either highly erodible in which case it should be in grass and be utilized by livestock. Or it is too drought-prone, thin topsoil and little or no subsoil. Again, this should be in grass and be utilized by livestock. Or it is too rocky for cultivation and this too should be in grass and be utilized by livestock. Just because it was once farmed and is now in the CRP doesn't mean it should be farmed again, but it should at least be used for livestock. 'Some' of the 'highly erodible' land might be OK to farm with no-till practices that reduce erosion, but that is debateable.

I totally agree the .gov should not be paying farmers to not plant.

All farmers I know are going to plant something on their acreages (unless it's CRP), it is just a matter of whether they plant corn, beans, sorghum, wheat etc. So we can't just magicly produce more. Irrigation and fertilizing can result in more production but at a cost. And that would not likely bring a drastic increase in production.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,401 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Please share with me your source that there is plenty of land in this nation that is not "under the plow". The only land I know of not being farmed shouldn't be farmed anyway, it's either highly erodible, drought-prone, or too rocky to plant.

Backyard gardens? Meh... They may get a few servings a week, but that's all and most will quit when they find out how much work it is and how much it actually costs them for ta few mouthfuls.
Why don't you share your sources that back up your bravado? You want to call me ignorant so lay out your concrete facts to back your statements.

I especially want to see your data on the two comments you made about backyard gardens, they only "get a few servings a week" and "most quit when they find out how much work it is".

We'll see who is talking out their posterior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Why don't you share your sources that back up your bravado? You want to call me ignorant so lay out your concrete facts to back your statements.

I especially want to see your data on the two comments you made about backyard gardens, they only "get a few servings a week" and "most quit when they find out how much work it is".

We'll see who is talking out their posterior.

Personal experience friend. Grew up in farming, still involved. I live it. I see it. I'm not blowin smoke...

Sorry I rained on your parade, but there are no vast areas that can readily be put into production.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,243 Posts
So if you believe in capitalism as opposed to say socialism you will probably agree if food prices skyrocket more farmers will enter the market to take advantage of the profits and prices will come back down and there will not be food shortages. This works in a country like America where we have plenty of farmable land.

I'm starting to see a trend, websites have been prodicting the "collapse" for years, I think it really got popular in 1999. I definitely think we should all prepare for tough times but I don't think I can keep expecting it any minute. Here's a classic example of the end of the US being predicted for 2008:
As America Collapses US Government Secret Plans Revealed | Dprogram.net

The problem will not be food shortages, you will be able to go to the store and there will be food on the shelves. As the dollar keeps on devaluing - the price of food will become so expensive that you will not be able to afford it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,401 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Personal experience friend. Grew up in farming, still involved. I live it. I see it. I'm not blowin smoke...

Sorry I rained on your parade, but there are no vast areas that can readily be put into production.

So let me get this straight, by looking around you have surmissed there are "no more vast areas that can be readily put into production"?

Let's try using some thing called "facts" (hint they involve hard numbers from credible sources)
The CRP: Paying Farmers Not to Farm : NPR
"This year, instead of crops, 34 million acres of American farmland will produce tall grass, pheasants and ducks. That's thanks to the Conservation Reserve Program, a USDA program to protect soil, streams and wildlife habitat on farms that accounts for about 8 percent of all farm subsidies in 2005."
"It's easy to tell what land in the Dakotas is part of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Those fields have no cattle grazing in them, and they aren't plowed or growing crops. Instead, they're filled with tall grass. Often, you'll see piles of rocks along the edges of those fields, a tell-tale sign that someone once plowed those fields and grew wheat there."


WOW 34 MILLION ACRES!!!! Is that vast enough for you there friend?
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top