SILOED FARMERS

Yesterday I spoke on the National Mall in Washington D.C. as part of the U.S. 250th commemoration called The Great American State Fair.  My spot was right after Callie Means and the day was themed MAHA.  My 45-minute speech, titled FOOD EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, was recorded and will be available in a day or so.  Stay tuned for a link.

                  But the most interesting part of the day was meeting with a couple of officials at the U.S. Trade Representative offices.  I was impressed with both young men.  They eagerly listened to my pitch on Food Emancipation but then the conversation took a natural turn to soybeans.  

                  Realize that these officials are the brains and negotiators behind President Trump's tariffs and all the other business deals, from chips to wine.  I admitted to them that one of the most enigmatic foreign policy issues I've wrestled with over the years is free trade vs. tariffs.  Students of history know that until Woodrow Wilsonsky (he was a socialist) inaugurated the Internal Revenue Service, no American ever had to pay a tax to the federal government.

                  The federal government received income from two things:  tariffs (sometimes called excise taxes) on foreign imports and a levy against the states based on population.  That was why the census began, to determine the per-head count from the various states to collect their portion of the federal budget.

                  Free traders dominated American policy until Trump came in and brought back the tariffs.  Here's why:  free trade only works if the two parties have similar contexts.  But when one has tyrannical regulations, from employee oversight to environmental rules, and the other is a free-for-all, those are not similar business contexts.  So the tariffs protect domestic business from burdensome regulation and licensure that puts their costs arbitrarily higher than competitors who don't have similar requirements.  This includes competitors who receive foreign aid from the regulation-heavy country.

                  Now what about soybeans?  If your head is in the news, you know China, which purchased a quarter of U.S. soybean exports, retaliated to new tariffs by shutting off soybean purchases.  Now to the interesting information from these trade officials.

                  They said in their circles it's common knowledge that China is desperate to wean themselves from any agricultural dependency on the U.S.  They do not want to rely on an adversary for their food.  They're on a fast track to eliminate soybean purchases from the U.S. and hope to close that situation in the next two years.

                  Which prompted the trade officials to ask me, a farmer:  "What's with these farmers?  Do they not see where this is going?  Are they this blind to reality?  Are they really this siloed?"

                  To these trade officials, America feeding itself is a national security priority, which was one reason they wanted to talk with me about domestic food production and marketing.  Here we are, desperate for beef, and we have soybean farmers refusing to grow anything but soybeans and demanding taxpayers to subsidize them for growing an unnecessary volume.  It's insane.

                  We need to feed ourselves first, not tax ourselves to death to dump cheap soybeans on a strategic competitor.  The more you look at the situation the more outrageous the soybean farmers' demands become.  But the core of the Senate Republicans come from Big Ag states in the midwest and they are beholden to industrial/chemical soybean production.

                  Is it okay to resent these soybean farmers?