this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2025
341 points (99.4% liked)

Political Memes

8918 readers
2403 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sudo@programming.dev 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Only would happen if he slashes corn subsidies which would be way dumber than the tariffs he first proposed.

[–] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Trump and his friends have been buy cane futures. He doesn’t give a shit about Americans

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why? Slashing the corn subsidies would be good.

[–] sudo@programming.dev 2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Many of food staples cannot be produced at a profit without subsidies, corn in particular. Since all of our farms are for profit farmers will destroy their crops Grapes Of Wrath style to drive up prices.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Why do you think they would need a subsidy in order to be profitable?

I haven't read the Grapes of Wrath - wouldn't "defecting" farmers who didn't destroy their crops have an advantage?

[–] sudo@programming.dev 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

They currently do need subsidies to be profitable. Farmers destroying their own crops to raise prices is a well documented historical fact and it still happens today particularly when it comes to livestock. This is not my abstract conjecture.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

But in the examples I'm familiar with, they do it because of regulation or collusion, not because of a lack of subsidies.

[–] sudo@programming.dev 1 points 39 minutes ago

You're either citing some failed new deal policy or various libertarian myths that the government still pays farmers to destroy their crops.

When there is such a supply is too high and the demand is too low, farmers will destroy their own crops instead of taking them to market. This is because the price of the crop is lower than the price of actually taking it to market. This is bad for two reasons:

1 There could still be a real "demand" for the product just not an "economic" demand. IE people don't have the money to pay for the crop such as in the Great Depression or the COVID pandemic.

2 Food is the primary good you want as abundant as possible in any economy at the lowest prices. Other such goods are steel, energy, railway transport, ie goods that other markets depend on. That runs contrary to the interests of the producers of those goods. They want to hit the sweet spot where profit is highest. The two main solutions for this are subsidies or nationalization. For example, China has nationalized steel production and rail transport which they intentionally operate at a loss for the benefit of the rest of the economy.