|
John's World
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Do North...
Have you ever checked at the summer/autumnal solstice to see if your farmstead, buildings, UFO landing strips, etc. were laid out exactly E-W or lined the North Star up with your grain bin layout? You haven't? Well, then me neither. How nerdy would that be? Heh. ![]() But if you farm in Manhattan, the day is approaching when you can observe an interesting solar alignment phenomenon. For Manhattan, a place where evening matters more than morning, that special day comes on May 30th this year, one of only two occasions when the Sun sets in exact alignment with the Manhattan grid, fully illuminating every single cross-street for the last fifteen minutes of daylight. The other day is July 13th. Had Manhattan's grid been perfectly aligned with the geographic north-south line, then our special days would be the Spring and Autumn equinoxes, the only two days on the calendar when the Sun rises due east and sets due west. You guys probably don't do druid parties either, I'm guessing. Never mind. [via 3Quarks]
The summer of our discontent...
I have taken the time to re-read most of my posts about the farm bill progress (?) through Congress [Note: you can do like wise by clicking on "farm bill" in the labels below.] The most upbeat spin I can put on them is they are not totally cynical. But they are not far from it. Despite my efforts to write honestly, this likely is an unfair characterization of events, influenced no doubt by my strong belief farm policy could be so much better. (And at times my concerns about rain - foolish, but a typical farmer trait) So it struck me hard to read these words from an observer whose work and opinion I admire immensely - Jim Weisemeyer. Comments: Will Peterson confront the "magic beans" and "monopoly money" charges by detailing where the $17.5 billion to $18 billion from the so-called reserve funds will come from? He has failed to detail the offsets so far and most expect him to be silent again. If all this sounds bewildering, it is. It's no wonder the vast majority of voters are losing faith in their government. The House farm bill process is another sad example of how not to write a major bill. I may get into hot water for borrowing rather liberally from subscription-firewalled material, but these thoughts are, I believe profoundly important. Jim rarely expresses even mild judgments of the politicians he chronicles meticulously in his professional writing, let alone lapse into frustration. I do not suggest he is corroborating my low opinion of recent farm bill (in)action. His information is far purer than mine, but his thoughts do seem to address the growing concern about Americans' alienation from our own government. How do people think the Democratic Congress is doing after six months? Lousy. But better than the alternative.As many have pointed out, this discontent - which strikes me as truly more deeply felt than our usual contempt for politics - is occurring as our economy chugs along briskly. The American Way is to rank financial progress 90% of the score, right? Steve Chapman puts his finger on the reason, I believe. A major cause of the misperception, though, is President Bush's sagging popularity. It's clear that many people let their discontent with the president color their view of everything. If he is failing to win the war in Iraq or curb illegal immigration, we assume he must also be coming up short on the economy.This rings true for me. It also forces me to reconsider if presidential popularity matters. I have always considered it to be simply news fodder - I mean, it's not like we could oust our leader at any moment by a show of hands. But perhaps there is something to political capital, and we are running a deficit. Let me hazard a prediction. If farm bill reform of some kind is not enacted (a replay of immigration), it will simply add to the widening chasm between people and government, making any political progress even harder, and fueling a spirit of futility and even despair. The farm bill debate has achieved that level of national prominence and involvement. This disillusionment, if eventually reflected in economic terms such as consumer spending, will make any recovery all the harder. The connection between business and politics is real, but subject to delays between actions and consequences. The inability to effect collective change would seem to be good for conservatives, but that presumes we are in a happy place right now. And fewer and fewer citizens seem to feel that way. This creates a real political conundrum. If Americans lose faith in government, no legislation will receive acceptance, because it is the creation of distrusted authors. How then will we address those issues? This is what happened perhaps to immigration reform. I think that if people did not already have the sense that their country was in some sense slipping away from them -- if they felt secure enough about our country and its direction -- then they would be a lot less inclined to think that illegal immigrants were taking it away from them. But the reason they think their country is slipping away from them need have nothing to do with illegal immigration itself, as opposed to a more general sense that the rules are stacked against them, and no one obeys the laws, and decent people who work hard get screwed. [More]I have no ready answer. But he urgency to accomplish something has increased. Our national character depends on a hopeful future. Labels: farm bill, immigration, politics
The fundamentals of great music...
I spoke this weekend on USFR on the misfortune of losing our music program at our local school. Without this early training how will we keep the tradition of singing in America? Sounds like these could be at risk. [via DailyDish] Thursday, June 28, 2007
The protectionist tide gets noticed...
Even while I support globalization on the whole, I have become convinced that we could do better the alleviate the misfortune of the biggest losers in the changes. Telling a 55 year-old autoworker to become a RN is no help, and rhetoric like that is one big reason many are no longer listening to rational arguments about the manifold benefits of greater world trade and integration. Surprisingly, many of America's financial leaders are agreeing. More striking are the report’s recommendations. It makes a strong case for the benefits of globalization (no surprise), but goes well beyond the usual corporate pablum of needing to equip American workers through better education. Since upgrading skills is a process that takes generations, the report argues, it will do little to shore up political support for globalization now. Instead the focus should be on improving the distribution of globalisation’s gains and doing more to help the losers. And that requires… a more progressive tax code and more (and better) government schemes to help displaced workers. I especially liked some of the suggestions in the report. The report takes particular aim at the (enormously regressive) payroll tax. Either payroll taxes should be integrated into the ordinary income tax system or the wage-cap on payroll taxes should be lifted. It brims with ideas for government tinkering: trade-adjustment assistance and unemployment assistance should be morphed into a single programme that offers wage insurance, portable health insurance and retraining. Communities should be able to federally insure their tax base against sudden economic dislocation (when, say, a factory moved to Mexico). [More] We can afford safety nets for people other than farmers. If we don't make the effort, many of our gains could be rolled back as trade barriers are rebuilt. Labels: economics, globalization
For the Frodo in all of us...
Want to build your own hobbit-house? (Well, that's what it reminded me of anyway) ![]() Much assembly required. But pretty cool. [via BoingBoing] Labels: fun Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Getting along...
International reaction to our farm bill debate and the ag subsidy roadblock at the WTO is ramping up. The two issues seem to have merged in the international press. Australia (BTW, one of our few allies in Iraq, remember): The 2007 Farm Bill is critical to Australia's interests because US subsidies to wheat, cotton sugar and dairy farmers have the potential to distort prices of some of our major agricultural commodities. Canada: The White House and key members of Congress had been pushing for major reforms aimed at cutting overall subsidies, capping payouts to millionaire farmers and generally bringing the regime into line with international trade rules.California (OK, it's technically not a foreign country, but it's close): Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is urging Congress not to forget their fruits and vegetables as they write a new federal Farm Bill. As Congress marches on to make the US the Land of the Corn via ethanol mandates, it strikes me as an excellent opportunity to try to give a little ground on our farm subsidies. If you haven't noticed, America is very slowly drifting into an isolated position in the world community. It was one story when we dominated every vital economic statistic, but that is hardly the case now. Crimony, if you can't get along with Canada, who's left to be friends with? Labels: farm bill, farm program, international, trade
iPods hurt corn farmers...
The entertainment industry is getting hysterical in its push to prevent video file-sharing (and outright piracy). In a breathtaking overreach, NBC is alleging video piracy hurts me out here on the farm, since fewer people will be going to the theater and won't be eating 5-gallon tubs of popcorn. We can all have a good snicker, but obviously some copywriter considers the American farmer the perfect pathetic victim poster-boy, like handicapped children or baby animals. Wonder how they get such ideas? And I wonder if any other farmers have wearied of hiding behind an public image of genial incompetence. [Thanks, Rodger] Tuesday, June 26, 2007
I've got some good news and, uh...
It turns out we all may have been worrying about anthropogenic climate change (global warming) unnecessarily. Following recent questions about how big US coal reserves really are, one analyst says we don't have to sweat carbon emissions - we're going to run out of fossil fuels way sooner than we thought. This fits with my intuition: We face such a huge looming problem with fossil fuels exhaustion that we should be thinking about moving away from fossil fuels due to rising costs and lowered production rather than because we might melt the polar ice caps. We need to embrace solar, nuclear, and wind because we just do not have as much fossil fuels left as the climate doomsters think we do.Oookay, there is room for all kinds of ideas, but we have been continually disappointed by the failure of an Energy Judgment Day to dawn. I changed my major in college from petroleum engineering to chemical engineering because a professor assured me we would be out of oil long before now. I think energy markets will advise us clearly about how fast we are running out of fossil fuels. And I don't see any real panic buying there yet. Labels: energy, global warming
Check it out on your vacation to Washington DC...
If you visit our capital this summer, take some time to at drive by the Dept. of Agriculture building. It is an enormous edifice and offers a hint of the massive bureaucracy that is sustained by our complex farm policy. ![]() Then consider this idea to umm, downsize this behemoth. The table shows that these reforms would eliminate 90 percent of the USDA’s budget, saving federal taxpayers $80 billion annually, or about $696 per U.S. household. Under the proposal, the USDA would retain responsibility for animal and plant health inspections, food safety, grain and packing inspections, and conservation activities. [Click on for larger image]I know, I know. Still, it's a thought. Labels: farm program, politics
A better direction...
While the Immigration Plan lives - despite Pres. Bush's well-meaning blunder - to see another day, its fate is very much in doubt. The senators voted, 64 to 35, to invoke cloture, or move to consideration of the bill itself. Since 60 votes are required for cloture, and only 45 voted for cloture two weeks ago, the measure’s supporters were heartened by today’s vote. Had the cloture vote failed today, the bill would have been dead for the foreseeable future. This could be some of the best work this Congress will do, because you can be sure few of them want to wrestle with this issue. Nonetheless, problems like this are their job and regardless of the outcome, it is encouraging to this observer to see Congress vote for something rather against everything. Still, along with others, I think I have found an immigration plan that addresses our real problems better. Another problem, though, was that the Senate bill was worse than it needed to be. On the legal side of the immigration equation, there are easy trade-ups to be had. In fact, even a National Journal columnist with no apparent qualifications could write a better bill.It may strike many of you as wrong-headed to argue for the economic merits of immigration when our culture itself seems to be at risk. I think we underestimate our ability to absorb and synthesize a new America with both Hispanic and European flavors. Besides, as I have argued ad nauseaum, the future belongs to those who will populate it. The Chinese will certainly be there, and the Indians, and with immigrants' help, America could be too. The U.S. Census Bureau this week reported that Hispanics, the largest minority at 42.7 million, are the nation's fastest-growing group. They are 14.3 percent of the overall population, but between July 2004 and July 2005, they accounted for 49 percent of US population growth. Of the increase of 1.3 million Hispanics, the Census Bureau reported, 800,000 was because of natural increase (births minus deaths), and 500,000 was due to immigration. [More]Many feel that national destiny is a function of wealth. I argue that our wealth is a function of population - that a growing economy needs a growing population, and furthermore, we can support far more people in the US that we have now. After all farmers haven been arguing that for decades, and now if we have enough productivity to add fuel to our output, we can surely feed a few more fellow citizens. At the center of our fears is, I think, the loss of our language and Northern European heritage. People speaking another language in OUR country stirs strong emotions. We have been here before. But I have great faith in the power of English ans a language and the American culture to absorb competing ways of life, simply because it is an amalgam itself. Our ability to find a new hybrid extends to more than just corn. Labels: culture, immigration, politics Sunday, June 24, 2007
Domino shortage in Japan worsens...
Five hundred fifty seconds of your life you'll never get back.
The backlash continues...
The Food vs. Fuel disagreement is intensifying. Ron Bailey - a science writer I greatly admire - backs up his opinion with good data: Another way to look at it is that it takes 450 pounds of corn to make enough ethanol to fill a 25-gallon gas tank. Four hundred and fifty pounds of corn supplies enough calories to feed a person for one year. The USDA projects that in 2010 the ethanol industry will consume 2.6 billion bushels of corn. A bushel weighs 56 pounds, so a quick calculation yields the result that 2.6 billion bushels of corn could supply enough calories to feed nearly 325 million people for a year. [More of a must-read for corn farmers] Even the popular ag speaker Dennis Avery is objecting. Unfortunately, U.S. corn land produces only 50 gallons worth of gasoline per acre per year—against an annual gasoline demand of 135 billion gallons. New U.S. ethanol plants coming on line could take 30 percent of next year’s U.S. corn for auto fuel—an unprecedented diversion of the world’s scarce cropland. Supplying the Bush goal of 35 billion gallons of ethanol per year would currently force farmers to clear more than 200 million acres of Midwest forest to supply even 10 percent of our gasoline demand from corn ethanol. [More] Too little, too late. It looks like the 35B gal. mandate will sail through Congress, locking our crop plans for the foreseeable future. The apparent benefits (energy independence without scrimping!) are too powerful for the actual numbers. Meanwhile, just in case we do get desperate enough for Brazilian ethanol, ADM is pursuing a rational strategy. Archer Daniels Midland, the nation's largest producer of ethanol fuel from corn, is setting its sights on a move into Brazil's sugar cane-based ethanol business, according to a published report.Mandates mess your your mind - not just your economics. I don't think we can predict how this legislated demand will change American agriculture because it is outside the realm of market economics. I'm getting the feeling this could be a spectacular ride for corn farmers. Labels: ethanol
Run, run - it's an Agribusiness Giant!...
I have been watching the media to make sure I know who the enemy is today. Number one is Terrorists, of course. They hate us for our freedom, apparently. But surging in the polls are Agribusiness Giants (AG). Descended no doubt from ancient Titans of Greek mythology, the mere mention of their names evokes evil and merciless power. Gird your loins, I'm going to horrify you: Oddly, I seldom see John Deere mentioned as an AG. (How embarrassing!) Nor does Pioneer - the leading seed grower (as of right now) - often fall into this category. One wonders if this is a coup by their public relations people or a failure. Regardless, the AG epithet is becoming stale, I think - perhaps even lame. Few talk about "giants" in other sectors or even care. Think about Toyota as an "autoindustry giant". Just doesn't work, does it? Here is how I see it. Cargill and ADM are customers of mine. I like customers of all sizes. Oddly, I have discovered that bigger customers often pay better and their checks don't bounce. All in all, I don't worry about the size of my customers, I worry about what they want to buy. As for Monsanto, they are a supplier. If somebody else can give me more value for my money, they are soo yesterday on this farm. Even AG's can't strip me of my right to choose. Labels like "agribusiness giant" are little more than code for "I wish I was (or worked for) them". And that envy comes from seeing business done well. Labels: culture
The end of civilization as we know it...
The possibility of a different kind of farm program has moved some legislators to near hysteria. "It's a threat to rural America. It's a threat to every consumer - a threat to the nutrition of the whole, entire world," said Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla. Oh, puleeze - pretty much the rest of the universe knows subsidized commodity prices have little effect on food prices. In fact, the NCGA is bragging about it. In fairness, milk and sugar prices could be significantly lower without current policy, but obviously Rep. Lucas is unaware of how those programs work. The idea my $24/A payment controls my destiny is embarrassingly ludicrous. Seems to me we're consolidating pretty vigorously even as we speak under current policy. And the pennies worth of grain in cereal is dwarfed by say, the latest advertising campaign. Do the math, for Pete's sake. Labels: farm program, policy, politics
Missing in action...
The blogging has been slow for two reasons. First, our mini-drought. We have been pretending to grow corn and beans for a bout three months with a few tenths of rain. While things never looked very bad, I have taught myself the unfortunate habit of imagining really credible scenarios of doom and despair. Creativity does not come easy with those brain chemicals washing around your head. Second, as we finally got relief (1.8" over the last few days), it came at a price - about $600 so far. Lightning stuck a power pole about 300' from our house and zapped our satellite TV and water pump. Nothing like no water to rearrange your work schedule. Finally, I will be presenting to an ag leadership group from the IA Farm Bureau on Monday. These are superb programs (If you are in IA and are interested I can give you a contact- drop me an e-mail) and I keep revising the presentation so it's more up-to-date. At some point this afternoon, I gotta put a fork in it and call it done. How's that for excuse-making? I haven't been married for 36 years for nothing. Posting (and replies) should accelerate presently. Thanks for all your great comments. Labels: blog Friday, June 22, 2007
Another side of the debate...
As the increasingly divisive debate over immigration continues, efforts are stepping up to manage the labor problem if immigrants are not available. Like robot fruit pickers. ![]() The more interesting aspect of the post for me was the tone of the comments. The immigration quarrel seems to bring out the worst in Americans. It could also the THE issue for 2008. [Thanks, Patrick] Labels: immigration, politics, technology
Nature's most perfect junk food...
![]() Hard-hitting investigative reporting of where Twinkies come from - a subject close to my heart. [via Neatorama] Labels: fun
Remember interest rates?...
While our economists and politicians work to ignore our growing (albeit a bit more slowly) deficit, other countries are trying to figure out where to invest surpluses. Up until recently, one of the assets of choice has been American debt: T-bills and bonds. Maybe not for much longer. Sovereign wealth funds (SWF) may total as much a $2.5T and they have been looking for a bigger bang for those bucks. All the more so with inflation heating up. The result has been a torrent of money into a finite pool of assets. There is no precedent for such fortunes suddenly to find their way into global financial markets, and they help explain the waterfall of liquidity that has driven up the value of risky (and less risky) assets of all descriptions around the world. The world's entire supply of shares is $55 trillion, and bonds account for a similar amount. Sovereign-wealth funds could soon become the most important buyers of such assets, and many others besides. If so, the world will witness the intriguing spectacle of its largest private companies being owned by governments whose belief in capitalism is often partial. [More]Our interest rates have been underwritten by the fanatical devotion of Chinese and Japanese governments with US debt instruments. Without those ready buyers, the Federal Reserve may have to raise rates to entice new buyers - even if they are not alarmed about inflation. The growing importance of SWFs and diversification into other markets is beginning to attract both worry and criticism.If this strikes you as mildly concerning, you are not alone. Consider this futuristic fable from an business observer: All of that borrowed money had to come from somewhere, and most of it came from Asia. When China stopped turning up at bond auctions in 2007 and started investing directly in companies instead, alarm bells should have rung. They didn't.... I'm not as pessimistic as the writer, although he makes good points, but I do think the days of cheap money, like cheap oil and cheap corn are probably over for some time. It also means the Fed may become less of a news source than during the Greenspan days. Labels: economics, finance, international, policy Thursday, June 21, 2007
Without us...
In a fascinating piece of imagination and scientific inquiry, Alan Weisman describes what would happen if we humans suddenly weren't here. There are places in Manhattan where they’re constantly fighting rising underground rivers that are corroding the tracks. You stand in these pump rooms, and you see an enormous amount of water gushing in. And down there in a little box are these pumps, pumping it away. So, say human beings disappeared tomorrow. One of the first things that would happen is that the power would go off. A lot of our power comes out of nuclear or coal-fired plants that have automatic fail-safe switches to make sure that they don’t go out of control if no humans are monitoring their systems. Once the power goes off, the pumps stop working. Once the pumps stop working, the subways start filling with water. Within 48 hours you’re going to have a lot of flooding in New York City. Some of this would be visible on the surface. You might have some sewers overflowing. Those sewers would very quickly become clogged with debris—in the beginning the innumerable plastic bags that are blowing around the city and later, if nobody is trimming the hedges in the parks, you’re going to have leaf litter clogging up the sewers. His book - A World Without Us - is not a scold about why we are doomed to extinction, just a science fiction experiment in what would happen. And I gotta admit, I have speculated myself on what this piece of the globe would look like without farmers like me grooming and repairing constantly. Exactly why this captivates me I'm not sure. End-of-the-world scenarios are a part of our literature and religion (e.g. The Rapture). Perhaps it stems from our deeply held conceit the world just can't get along without us. Labels: science
Google has made me the man I am today...
About 18 months ago I stopped trying to remember things. What a time saver! Instead of thinking - I just "google". The results were a greatly improved grasp of the trivial, and slightly higher electric bills. And an even sadder social life. Well, imagine my shock and awe when I discovered your choice of search engine really affects your search results. For instance, the study compared the first-page searches from major engines and found that on average: Are we being insidiously massaged into perfect clients of these on-line entities? Are our attitudes and beliefs at risk of being subtly shaped by which icon we click? Not according to my search results. [Bonus: James Fallows (the post source) also added a link to a post he did in 2004 about why Google was a bad investment. I have calculated how many acres $1000 invested in AOL or Microsoft or Google at the right moment could buy on several occasions. It seems so obvious now.] Labels: computer, culture, technology Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Those wacky foodies...
Of all the burning issues to take a stand on, our (yes, you're responsible for it) government is pushing back against the the Whole Foods-Wild Oats merger. The background: We're in the midst of a merger mania, and the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department's antitrust division—the agencies tasked with assuring that mergers don't harm consumers by reducing competition—have approved almost every deal. If the nation's largest hog producer buys the second-largest hog producer? OK. Telecommunications giants SBC and AT&T want to merge? No problem. Giant supermarket company Albertson's and giant supermarket company SuperValu get together? You got it. Color me surprised. I didn't think any merger would rouse this administration to anti-trust action. This is a pretty small beachhead to take a stand on and have any legal/historical impact, IMHO. Organic consumption is still a tiny fraction of food sales, regardless of the press it receives. Meanwhile, the organic soothsayers are parsing the morality of various forms of preservation for apples. Currently, organic apples that go into storage are refrigerated at 0 °C (32 °F) under low oxygen conditions. The reduced oxygen content is maintained by a constant flow of low-grade nitrogen, the researchers explained in the paper. (The use of nitrogen and the manipulation of oxygen levels are not considered violations of organic growing principles because the storage environment, rather than the produce itself, is affected.) The refrigeration process is so expensive to maintain that most organic orchards have their fruit turned into apple butter, juice, and sauce rather than put into cold storage. As a result, few organic apples are available past the harvest months, driving up the price of the fruit. [More] I don't know. Smells like science to me. This type of deep pondering over whether a specific technology is appropriate or not - similar to Amish rule making - is difficult for an engineer like me to embrace. The war against technology and science may never end. But in the meantime, we progress. Labels: food, organic, technology
The cost of tradition...
Many ecological problems we struggle with are the result of traditions of human behavior being carried forward into conditions wildly different than when they originated. One such example it the traditional Hindu funeral pyre. A SWEET whiff of burning flesh hangs over India’s open-air cremation grounds. The reason is that the traditional funeral pyres preferred by Hindus are extremely inefficient. On a windless day disposing of the remains of a fully-grown Hindu can take six hours and 500kg of wood.As Americans slowly change their funerary choices to include more cremations, unused burial plots are flooding the market. Think the residential real estate market is tough? Try finding a buyer for your unwanted graves. Farmers tend to think our business changes slowly. We don't know from slow. Labels: culture
Some you win, some you lose, and some...
You don't even score. The battle to reform farm policy may turn out to be little more than a tantrum. Gosh, it was exciting for a while. Imagine treating farmers like grownups! Even the White House got caught up in it. But we were just fooling ourselves. A House ag subcommittee just brought us back to reality. The panel, a subcommittee of the House Agriculture Committee, brought each of several proposals for change to the farm bill to a vote before rejecting them, sending a strong message to those pushing for major changes to farm legislation. They include the Bush administration and a bipartisan coalition led by Representative Ron Kind, Democrat of Wisconsin.Extending the current farm bill is easier, of course and will allow those of us who have been winners to continue current trends. We could know the outcome soon enough for 2008 cash rent bids, and without any meaningful payment limits, we can guess what that market will look like. While there may be some minor drama on the House floor, or even the Senate, I'm sensing a political waxing here. The effort to persuade for rational treatment of our profession by our government is just one of a number of lost causes I have supported. Like the metric system. I'm also cashing my checks with a slightly clearer conscience. (Not really - but it sounds tough, doesn't it?) Labels: farm bill, farm program, policy, politics Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Knowhatimean?...
How many clichés can you pack into a 150-word paragraph? Beat this entry: I hear what you're saying but, with all due respect, it's not exactly rocket science. Basically, at the end of the day, the fact of the matter is you have got to be able to tick all the boxes. It's not the end of the world, but, to be perfectly honest with you, when push comes to shove, you don't want to be literally stuck between a rock and a hard place. Going forward we need to be singing from the same songsheet but you can't see the wood from the trees. Naturally hindsight is 20/20 vision and you have to take the rough with the smooth before proceeding onwards and upwards. The bottom line is you wear your heart on your sleeve and, when all is said and done, this is all part and parcel of the ongoing bigger picture. C'est la vie (if you know what I mean). [More]I think we've all learned something here. Labels: fun
The Dream Team...
Or Nightmare on Pennsylvania Avenue? New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has dropped his affiliation with the Republican Party (haven't we all?) fueling speculation about a third party candidacy. I would consider supporting him. He wouldn't need any special interest money, he could finance his campaign from his laundry budget. Throw in the Gubernator and this could get interesting. Labels: politics
Sarkozy and farmers...
Although he made pleasing sounds about protecting French farming interests during the campaign, I think the conservative Mr. Sarkozy might be a disappointment to French agriculture. One early signal might be the bizarre turn in the serious problem in France's wine industry. Such frustration has now boiled over into the threats of violence by the Crav, made in a video message sent to France's new President, Nicolas Sarkozy. The law-and-order issues like immigration as well as budget problems that brought Sarkozy election success may put ag support on back burner politically. French farmers have always tended to be demonstrative, so this will bear watching. Labels: globalization, international
The guest worker problem...
Much of the anxiety of the current immigration debate is centered on the proposed guest worker program, which has been largely advanced by agriculture (although only 4% of immigrants work in ag) and other employers. Much of what we suspect - not know - about guest workers is ill-informed or influenced by other fears. For example, many think outsiders depress the wages of native workers. But not to the degree you might suspect. But immigrants tend to work in different industries than native workers, and have different skills, and so they often end up complementing native workers, rather than competing with them. That can make native workers more productive and therefore better off. (In construction, for instance, the work of carpenters and masons, who are often immigrants, can create a need for crane operators and foremen, who tend to be native-born.) According to a recent study by the economists Gianmarco Ottaviano and Giovanni Peri, between 1990 and 2004 immigration actually boosted the wages of most American workers; its only negative effect was a small one, on the wages of workers without a high-school diploma. And if by increasing the number of legal guest workers we reduced the number of undocumented workers, the economy would benefit even more. [More] There are many aspects to the immigration debate, and the most likely outcome right now is to continue the status quo - hardly a good working solution. Hardliners who want to wall-and-deport cannot muster the political power to spend the enormous sums needed for that kind of enforcement - even if it is possible. The current answer for most problems in the US is more police of some kind - more coercion. One the the amazing features of American success has been voluntary compliance. Or as in the case of income taxes - a pretty good try. It seems to me America works best when we simply show people our way of doing things and they choose to copy us. We are less successful using strong-arm tactics. See "policy, foreign" I am concerned this debate will produce only a larger enforcement sector in the US economy ( a really unproductive activity), a less than charming no-man's land on our border, a crippled economy, and significant alienation for many of our citizens. And about the same number of illegal immigrants. Labels: immigration Sunday, June 17, 2007
Food fight...
The awakening food ethics movement has produced an oddly confrontational debate about which principle should occupy prime status. Some may say that a food that is organic and a food that is carbon neutral are two different things. For some, to eat organic is a diet choice, and not necessarily a consideration of whether a food has been flown from Turkey or Thailand. [More]Meanwhile the concept of "food miles" is searching for relevance. Local food must be more environmentally friendly, they say – the distance it travels from farm to fork is shorter so its carbon footprint is smaller. Right? Wrong. Local food, per se, is not necessarily more environmentally friendly than that produced overseas. There is no reason, per se, that food produced in Kent has a lower environmental footprint than food produced in Kenya. Should industrial commodity farmers care about this tempest in a teapot? I think so - at least to the point of careful watchfulness. As the agrarian sector of agriculture develops its position it can command enough public support to affect the regulation of agriculture, making the the business of supplying 6.2 billion people with food more difficult than it could be. Friday, June 15, 2007
What happens when people debate in good faith...
To my surprise, I have found a global warming skeptic with a cogent idea how to attack the problem. I like it, and I think ideas such as his could be the outcome once the shouting and fingerpointing becomes boring (and many of us are pretty much there already). His idea - while hard to summarize briefly - is a carbon emissions tax with a rate set by the actual evidence of global warming. The more proof - the higher the tax, in short.
Regardless, I appreciate suggestions for solutions in addition to proof of one position or other. Labels: global warming, policy
Why we don't read much about Argentina anymore...
Remember when the Argentina corn crop was a big deal for corn markets? And when we watched their growing production with nervousness? Here's why it's hard for countries to stay in competition with us long-term when they don't have the the kinks worked out of their government yet. The economy is recovering, but it's clear that most Argentines don't have much faith that it will last. Many feel that the government is being dishonest about its economic data—or just making it up. One Argentine woman told me that though the government insists there's no inflation, the same pay that bought a cartful of groceries two months ago now buys just two bags. Too often we forget how long and difficult our struggle to create our government has been. And how relatively successful. Regardless how many flaws we can find with our peculiar form of democracy, there are many worse. Actually, about all of 'em. Thursday, June 14, 2007
Icon not understand it...
One of agriculture's most enduring cultural icons has been the windmill. I mean, what would we print on our checks and business cards without gambrel barns, windmills, and domed silos? More importantly what does it say that we have no images from agriculture as we now practice it that we embrace as evocative of our way of life? We clothe ourselves in a past that has not just faded in reality but nearly from memory. I've never had any of the three (or even a narrow-front tractor) on my farm in my life, for example. Indeed, to keep the memory of windmills going there is a Windmill Museum in Lubbock, TX. (If you are going by, stop in a post a note about your experience.) Farmers wonder and occasionally fume that others consider them stuck in the 1950's. Consider this current quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica: Nearly every well-equipped farm has at least one silo—a tall cylindrical structure in which slightly fermented fodder is stored in a controlled environment for use as animal feed. This stored fodder, called silage, or ensilage, rivals fresh feed in providing the nutrients necessary for livestock.Maybe we are - in our minds. Labels: culture, history, rural life
You may be in a bubble if...
Signs of the economic times - our first global bubble? If Hirst designed a vegetable display, it would look like the shop window at the just-opened Whole Foods Market Inc. branch in Kensington, one of London's ritziest shopping areas. Analysts at JPMorgan Chase & Co. calculate that Kensington could contribute as much as 1.8 percent of the food retailer's total sales. Whole Foods said last month that second-quarter revenue was $1.46 billion. Try as I might, I cannot wrap my mind around the staggering wealth growth in the world, and especially our own country. Sometimes anecdotes help to get a perspective, but mostly I think I've dropped out of the mainstream. Or I'm just clueless. Wednesday, June 13, 2007
To build a fire*...
A fascinating collection of fire-building techniques - not the least of which is using Stone Age tools.[via Metafilter] * A Jack London story I read as a boy that ruled out my ever living in the Yukon. Labels: fun
Take it to the bank...
I have been nattering on for some time that the ethanol business is not amenable to economic analysis because it is driven by politics, not value. A critic agrees with me: Except - there is no ethanol "market." The ethanol business is driven by government planners, not freely acting buyers and sellers.Regardless of whether you appreciate his reflections or not, it is the realization of the power of myth involved in the ethanol story. This is why, gentle readers, I am not waiting for the bubble to burst or land prices to plummet. Indeed, I consider this moment the time to double down on our corn bets. I know, I know - I'm looking at a drought too. But this thing is not going away. It's true that the ethanol stocks I wrote about last summer have declined on fears of a glut. Under current law, most gas can't contain more than 10 percent ethanol, and at some point all the gas will be blended. Most cars aren't supposed to use richer blends. A fall in gas prices would also hurt ethanol producers.It is not necessary to agree with every aspect of a business to profit by it. Tuesday, June 12, 2007
A sense of perspective...
We forget how flippin' huge our economy is. This map may help. ![]() [click on map for larger image] By linking GSP (Gross State Product) to GDP (Gross Domestic Product) you can get a sense of how far ahead we are economically, despite all the hype about other countries' growth rates. The blogger where I found this map had a rather curious comment: The creator of this map has had the interesting idea to break down that gigantic US GDP into the GDPs of individual states, and compare those to other countries’ GDP. What follows, is this slightly misleading map – misleading, because the economies both of the US states and of the countries they are compared with are not weighted for their respective populations.The population matters little, IMHO. The size of the economy is the size of the economy. Period. Labels: economics
Why they invented "yadda yadda"...
![]() Behold the largest island in a lake on an island in a lake on an island. [via Metafilter] Labels: fun
Are you doing your part?...
Americans are only 40th in the world in alcohol consumption. ![]() Some of you obviously aren't trying. Actually, I found this statistic mildly encouraging. Especially after reading about Japan and the almost mandatory alcohol consumption for mid-level workers. [More in a new book review soon] Labels: culture
Inquiring minds want to know...
It's kinda like Googling yourself for farmers. Look up your entry in the EWG database. Regardless of your position on subsidies, this is impressive computer work. And to date, even the most vehement payment boosters have found no grounds to claim the EWG results are inaccurate. In fact, their database work informs the farm bill debate. (As opposed to having NASS or ERS generate numbers 5 years later) I like the map feature, although it reinforces something I noticed a few years ago. Not too many farmers live around me. Lots of farmland - just not many resident tillers in my area. Maybe it's me. Labels: farm bill, farm program, policy Monday, June 11, 2007
I hope they use it for football scholarships...
The USDA has made subsidy data much more personal. It's not just wealthy individuals who get farm subsidies - state governments are reaping the benefits too. In Arkansas, for example, EWG ranks the state's Department of Correction as the top subsidy beneficiary, pulling in nearly $2.3 million from 2003-2005. The University of Illinois is first in Illinois, with nearly $1.3 million in payments for the three-year period. [More] [Emphasis added]I just don't get any sense of outrage, but maybe the combined efforts of disparate voices such as Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) will have some effect: Current farm policy favors corporate special interests. Fully 70 percent of the payments go to the top 10 percent of farmers, and even more of that benefit is concentrated for the large processors. What’s more, aid is so concentrated in a few powerful states that the support received by most states is almost negligible. We deserve a food and farm policy that serves all Americans, not just the politically-connected. [More]It would be easy to giggle about a liberal from Oregon wandering into the farm policy debate like a choirboy into a pool hall, but efforts like these have sprung up all over. While they may be too diffuse politically to accomplish much, we DCP-collectors need to remember we can't fool all of the people all of the time. If the issue is decided in committee, we can extrapolate our future pretty easily. If it is determined by the Congress as a whole, who knows?
The Iowa situation...
Gets even more byzantine. Rudy Giuliani: Six visits to the state show that Giuliani at least knows where Iowa is. But as a national figure who polls remarkably well, "America's Mayor" has made no secret of his emphasis on Florida and other "Super-Duper Tuesday" states over the traditional first three; strategists in rival campaigns simply note that garnering the nomination this way would upset the calendar once and for all. To the extent he does decide to take on the state, Giuliani's chances in Iowa are hampered by a slight tin ear for the rhythms of the heartland: it's not just his support of abortion rights and his colorful personal life, but missteps like his advance staff reneging on an event with an Iowa farmer who turned out not to be rich enough to help illustrate Giuliani's stance in support of abolishing the estate tax. [More]While some have argued moving up so many big-state primaries to early February will make Iowa more critical, I'm not so sure. This could be the last moment in the political sun for the tiny electoral prize. Labels: politics Sunday, June 10, 2007
Send him the $100...
Farm Journal's $100 Ideas oughta include farmers from all over. Like this Chinese dude who drank beer just to help his family have hot water. ![]() Solar powered and ethanol enhanced - true genius. [via Arbroath] Labels: fun
Feel first, think later..
A recent report in the journal Science corroborates something most of us have suspected for some time. We are basically moral weasels. In a review to be published in the May 18 issue of the journal Science, Jonathan Haidt, associate professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, discusses a new consensus scientists are reaching on the origins and mechanisms of morality. Haidt shows how evolutionary, neurological and social-psychological insights are being synthesized in support of three principles:The line about the lawyers was painful, but I suspect Haidt may be right. More intriguing is the possibility that science may make this problem even more divisive in our culture. When offspring genetic engineering becomes possible I expect parental choices to produce bigger differences in how people morally reason. Conservative-leaning people will make their children morally reason even more strongly in the conservative style. The liberals will do likewise. So the size of the center will shrink. This will lead to deeper political divisions and perhaps civil war in some countries and wars between countries.The most alarming prospect of genetic engineering of humans for me is, while we are busy deciding which traits and predispositions we want in our children, other cultures are out-reproducing us. We're overplanning - they are taking potluck, and getting on with business. Which system sounds like a winner to you? Labels: culture, population, science Saturday, June 09, 2007
It's not about insurance...
Masked by the political persiflage of the '08 Campaign is the quiet realization that the health care issue is really, really about controlling costs - not extending coverage. After more than a decade in the wilderness, health care has returned to the center of the political discussion. But the only topic getting any serious attention is universal health insurance. It’s the entire point of the ambitious new program in Massachusetts and a similar proposal in California. Universal coverage has dominated both the news media’s coverage of the Democratic presidential candidates’ reform ideas and the candidates’ own jockeying over those ideas. [More of an insightful article]The underlying problem is painfully (no pun intended) obvious. We cannot afford, individually or collectively all the health care we think we need. Worse still, we don't need much of what we want. Trying to sort these two ideas out will be the challenge. Our cultural obsession with medicine as the fix for bad choices complicates our thinking. Insurance masks the reality of health care by foisting the costs on third parties, penalizing those who by virtue genetics, luck or behavior need less care. This insulation is both seductive and destructive. Ultimately, I think we are headed for a collision of cultural values. We prefer insulation to real insurance. We expect services to be readily available, without the supply limitations or waiting lists that exist in countries where government is responsible for more health care funding. And yet we are growing increasingly concerned over the expansion of health care spending that takes place in a system that lacks constraints on either supply or demand. This is a discussion we can't avoid forever. And it may turn out less rancorous than we fear. Our powerful economy is making such decisions a little less painful every day.
Technology responds...
Science is not the awe-inspiring tool many of us grew up believing in. Not that it has changed, but I suspect the march of progress has quickened into a steady trot - faster than many can match. So we fall behind and choose to base our decisions on intuition and emotion instead. Even then, the pursuit of knowledge recognizes our disenchantment and adjusts to find answers to our fears. Farmers have struggled with educating observers about our ready alliance with chemical tools to control pests of all kinds. Perhaps it's fair to be suspicious of both agriculture and agribusiness - Lord knows we have been known to spin the truth a teensy bit. Even so, those whose passion in life is verifiable scientific truth labor on and produce answers to these challenges. Understanding biodegradability and being able to predict it before the compounds are released would address a wide range of objections and save countless resources testing those products. Scientists are getting results, and they are promising. Perhaps not surprisingly, the press release associated with this work focused on those compounds, including herbicides, that are most resistant to biodegradation, but fails to mention the even larger group of compounds that are intrinsically biodegradable. The usual news write ups about toxic chemicals and the environment 9999 times out of 10000 will inevitably highlight those that are the nastiest. News items like this renew my faith in our embrace of technology to improve our existence, and our ability to adjust course to confront legitimate concerns. Labels: future, science, technology
No wonder she was crying...
Observers close to the action at Paris Hilton's court appearance were struck by her tearful denunciation of the action of the House Subcommittee on Specialty crops ignoring calls for reform to farm payments. The draft also reauthorizes the peanut program, including an extension of the 2002 Farm Bill's direct and counter-cyclical payment and loan provisions for peanut farmers. The loan rate would be increased from $355 per ton to $375 per ton and payments acres would be lowered from 85% of base acres to 74%. (Well, they were pretty sure that was what she was wailing about.) I shed a tear as well. Given this development, the Pelosi position suddenly becomes more interesting. Labels: farm bill, farm program, policy, politics
Paris Hilton's cell phone...
May not work well in some rural areas - especially Downstate Illinois. And if landline companies have their way it may be some time before coverage gets better for the blond heiress. The Universal Service Tax (Fund) has benefited rural citizens by helping to establish rural telephone companies. Because telephones provide a vital link to emergency services, to government services and to surrounding communities, it has been our nation’s policy to promote telephone service to all households since this service began in the 1930s. The USF helps to make phone service affordable and available to all Americans, including consumers with low incomes, those living in areas where the costs of providing telephone service is high, schools and libraries and rural health care providers. Congress has mandated that all telephone companies providing interstate service must contribute to the USF. Although not required to do so by the government, many carriers choose to pass their contribution costs on to their customers in the form of a line item, often called the “Federal Universal Service Fee” or “Universal Connectivity Fee”. [More]But the fund has swollen to over $7B annually and is badly mismanaged. Sadly, this is a rural-on-rural problem. Most people familiar with the universal service fund, including members of the FCC, agree that it has grown out of tune with the times. But reforming it has proven difficult because small wireline telephone companies have grown accustomed to collecting subsidies and lobbying their political representatives to keep the money flowing, said U.S. Cellular's Rooney. [More]Those small wireline companies are typically rural phone coops whose business plans have always been financially distorted because a significant portion of their budget came from the USF - a permanent subsidy. The basic problem is that the High-Cost Fund subsidizes small rural local exchange carriers (RLECs) on the basis of their reported costs of providing service. This cost-plus system provides no incentive to reduce costs or to provide service using the most efficient technology. On the contrary, it rewards inefficiency. As a result, according to a recent study by George Mason University economist Thomas Hazlett, subsidies can be as much as $13,000 per year per line. Hazlett estimates that yearly savings of $1 billion are easily achievable using standard mobile and satellite phone subscriptions to provide service to people in sparsely populated areas. [More]Meanwhile, because IL cell phone companies have not been applying for USF funds to build towers downstate, the proposed cap means they won't be getting any in the future if they did try. Bottom line, the pattern of some rural/farm constituents optimizing subsidies more shrewdly than others continues. Recently, the USF has gained new attention as several Iowa-based companies have used USF subsidies to provide free, international calling.[1] This practice, which began in late 2006, represents an unintended consequence of the USF. [More]The secret seems to be to live in a state with 1 Senator for about every 1000 citizens, not Illinois. One solution Paris and I favor is reverse auctions: Another recommendation is the use of "reverse auctions" to assign universal service obligations, a plan endorsed by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. Phone carriers would compete to become the "provider of last resort" in areas where regulators deem local services insufficient, bidding a price, to be paid by the government, to supply such services. The lowest-cost bidder wins. [More]The political clout of rural telcos - the beneficiaries of these billions - will likely prevent this, unless the addition of wireless carriers changes the dynamics of the debate. Their argument of degraded communication consequences reminds me of predictions referring to commodity subsidy reform. Still cost-plus calculation to determine government support has seldom proven to be economically efficient. The process of learning competitive business practices would be difficult, but not impossible. Paris and I will be following this closely. (She has a little time on her hands right now.) Labels: communications, rural life, technology Friday, June 08, 2007
Any minute now...
A breathless announcement of a cellulosic ethanol breakthrough. At a Brazilian ethanol conference June 4-5, Brazilian government-funded researchers said they have perfected a method of producing cellulosic ethanol that drastically reduces the cost of processing. At this point, the assertion -- and many other similarly optimistic claims made at the conference -- is unconfirmed. But should it prove true, the world could well be peeking over the horizon at a massive geopolitical, not to mention economic, shift. [More] As many of you know, I consider cellulosic ethanol the cold fusion of agriculture - mostly because the energy density of the feedstock is so low, and transporting that much stuff negates the energy yield. More tricky is the problem of the ethanol production itself. Cellulosic biomass is bulky and materially complex, unfit for the same methods of ethanol extraction used with corn. In order to even get the stuff into manageable form, processors must soak it in a pre-treatment bath, followed by an acidic or enzymatic digestion that splits it into simple sugars. [More]Perhaps cellulosic ethanol will become a major part of energy plans. But think about the ramifications if we can sell crop residue. The ethanol boom will look like a cheap date. [via Andrew Sullivan] Labels: biofuel, energy, ethanol, technology Thursday, June 07, 2007
Uh-oh...
Guiliani is skipping Iowa. So is McCain. Farm policy may never see the light of day in this presidential campaign. I wonder what the economic loss to IA could be from reduced media coverage? Because the economic impact of a political primary is so short-lived, few deep analyses have been done on the subject. Officials in Iowa, which hosts the nation’s first contest in the presidential campaign calendar, the Iowa Caucus, suggest the quadrennial event brought between $70 million and $90 million into the state in 2000, but have never quantified how they arrived at that number. [More] Anther Pillar of Farm Policy trembles. Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Go figure...
The livestock industry asked some economists to estimate the effects of letting ethanol tax credits and tariffs expire in 2008. They seem to think it would be a good idea. So, equations were concatenated, models lovingly constructed, and serious hard-core economicking was done. In the end, the cattle and pig folks perhaps didn't get the answer they anticipated. An excellent summary is here at Farmgate. But lightly skipped over in the report and the study paper itself was this little gem. Livestock producers pay lower feed costs, but their inclination to raise output in response leads to falling output prices as quantities move along an inelastic demand. [Full report]Run that around in your mind for a while. First lesson: it's your own fault. You silly producers and your "inclinations". Second lesson: Lower feed costs are actually bad for livestock producers, because when feed costs go down, producers put more cattle on feed and farrow more pigs. With demand inelasticity, livestock income then drops as more meat lowers the price. Say what?? Reading this backwards, can we assume the new higher prices for corn are raising profits in the livestock sector? Those cowboys and hog producers should be rolling in the profits when corn hits $6! I will be looking forward to some cattle economist reaction to this strange conclusion. My instinctive response is meat production expansion is more a function of higher sales prices rather than lower input prices. After all we had $1.80 corn and expansion livestock numbers did not explode. [Update: As I was driving to South Bend (3 hrs 9 min best time) I had one of those "poster-regret" moments. The report shows "livestock receipts" which I believe to be gross sales - not gross profits as I had alluded to above. Hence lower feed costs should provide larger margins. However, looking at net farm income numbers lower down the table, it's hard to separate out the livestock/crop differences. It seems to show both sectors are net losers to me. My questions still stand.] Science - it's stranger than truth. One other assumption that caught my eye is that the mandate (RFS) stays where it is. I think it is reasonable (politically) to suggest that number is going to rise. I made this case previously. In which case, the loss of tax credits and tariffs mean much less, I would think. Reading carefully, I also note that the world very likely will not end without biofuel subsidies. (Well, they can't be absolutely certain of course) The rest of the conclusions are pretty predictable. Ethanol production slips, ethanol expansion slows, and farmers lose about $3B in gross receipts. Oh yeah, taxpayers save about $6B. As if we care. Still, it kinda makes you wonder where the other $3B goes each year, doesn't it? [The report does not note what the income implications for economic research organizations are if the tax and tariff weren't around to study.]
The precedent problem...
There are many cattlemen in disagreement with the voluntary BSE testing appeal decision by the USDA. One is our own Steve Cornett. Your reporter remains skeptical about USDA’s refusal to allow voluntary BSE testing. As has been argued before, it’s not that voluntary testing is needed or the expense justified.This semi-science matter may be linked in the USDA's policy thinking to analogous issues with BST-labels for milk. Allowing marketing differentiation based on the consumer's health perceptions and not the regulator's is profoundly new territory. It may be the USDA is appealing just to say "Hey, we did all we could - blame the courts", when beef industry honchos complain. As the music industry is finding out, consumers are getting pretty uppity these days. I think Steve is pointing the right way on this one. Labels: beef, food, milk, policy, regulation
The sausage recipe...
Interesting commentary on how the farm bill process might develop. “So this is a huge deal. If Pelosi blocks amendments on the bill, it is very possible that reforms suppported by the majority of the House will not be in the House version of the farm bill because votes will never be allowed. This would be a subversion of democracy- one committee being allowed to write an enormously important piece of legislation without regard to the desires of the rest of the House. In effect, this means that the citizens represented by Ag Committee members will get to write the farm bill- and to hell with everyone else.As I have said before, Pres. Bush (remember him?) is still a wild card, and could actually be a powerful reformer ally - regardless of whose side of the aisle they are on. The question is would reformers vote to sustain a veto? With Rep. Peterson apparently aiming for equal dissatisfaction as a goal, the mechanism seems to be in place for achieving this lofty ambition. Labels: farm bill, farm program, policy, politics Tuesday, June 05, 2007
How we got here...
A tragic and touching reminder of the the kind of people who made the Midwest. "Went to Kansas" - from diaries of Miriam Colt as she traveled to Kansas in search of a vegetarian utopia: AUGUST 5TH.-- Another most terrific thunder-storm broke, last night, peal after peal, over head in deafening, crushing sauna; and the lightning's glare seemed burning the heavens from pole to pole! the torrents of rain came right through the warped "shakes" on the roof; the wind was blowing--the mud, from the logs, and water, were flying in every direction through our cabin. I made every effort to keep my sick ones dry, but my husband, children, and myself, being in the loft, got completely drenched and my husband and children had their chills in the midst of the storm. We kept our beds until a late hour this morning, as wet as they were, they being the most comfortable place, while the sun was drying up the water around.I am struck by how mobile early Americans were despite the problems of travel. If you saw the PBS documentary "The Mormons" perhaps you noticed a similar theme of building a new society somewhere in the vast frontier, as Mrs. Colt also believed. What amazing people our forebears were. Or perhaps they were just like us, only faced with different circumstances and fewer easy options. I think this spirit lives on in America, but we work hard not to uncover it.
Father's Day Gift Hint...
Manly phones for manly men.Do you long for the days when a phone handset was comfortable, hefty and tough enough to be slammed onto the receiver when being solicited by telemarketers? Our retro handset brings back those good ol' days and looks cool too! In a world of small-and-getting-smaller-cellphones, this retro handset converts your tiny phone into a beefy, comfortable retro phone! 2.5mm jack works with most phones (Motorola, LG, Samsung); not compatible with RAZR or Nokia phones. Cell phone not included. Labels: fun
More reasons for the Bloomberg-Hagel ticket...
Maybe they don't seem like farm-subsidy friendly politicians, but still ya gotta respect a civic leader who can say things like this: While questions continue to arise about the alleged plot to blow up a fuel pipeline beneath JFK Airport and surrounding neighborhoods, some are questioning why New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg hasn't had a louder voice since the plot was foiled on Saturday.My thoughts exactly. The best answer to the terrorist threat is not to build a fortress America complete with police state and rampant paranoia. It is to keep on keepin' on. Meanwhile Sen. Hagel is mirroring my own political pilgrimage. What distinguishes the politician from the political agitator is a lively concern for his own job security. Politicians sometimes say what they believe, but they don't usually say things that might jeopardize their political future. Until recently, Chuck Hagel was a consummate politician, and a successful one at that. He defeated a popular sitting governor in his first Senate race in 1996 and won reelection, in 2002, with 83 percent of the vote. While he occasionally strayed from the GOP fold on foreign policy--an ardent internationalist, he had criticized both the Iraq war and neoconservatism generally--his credentials as a loyal Republican were never in doubt. He has long been a predictable vote on issues of importance to the American Conservative Union, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Christian right. And he remains so. It's not well-known, but Kyoto foe Hagel is still skeptical that humans are triggering global warming. "We always had climate change," he told me during a recent interview. "The issue is what is causing this. We still do not know." [More of an superb article, free subscription required and recommended]While we parse the minute details of nuance and expression of the early debates, I find hope for the Republic in people like these who are increasingly compelled by their beliefs, rather than polls. Labels: politics
Happy Birthday toooo yooooouuu....
The Apple II computer was born 30 years ago. Looking back, I would have to say no other invention has changed my life as much. ![]() The Apple II remains one of the most successful personal computers ever built and, in fact, remained in production until October 1993, when the Macintosh finally put it out to pasture. In all its iterations, around 6 million of these puppies rolled off the assembly line. [More] Here's the most astonishing part. In 1980, I paid $5400 for an Apple II, 2 disk drives, color monitor and printer. It remains the most expensive computer I have ever bought - and I think I am on #14 right now. Faster, more powerful, cheaper. Pretty impressive legacy. Labels: technology
Hardly working...
One of the most disconcerting problems that has popped up in my life is the adjustment from the nature of farm work to working with words and ideas (writing, TV, speaking). In fact, Jan and I both notice how much more fun farm work seems to be simply in contrast to our other jobs. For example, take something as straightforward as planting. There is a start and a finish, clear objective standards of good and bad results, and you can tell how close you are to being done easily. None of these apply to writing this blog entry, on the other hand. Much of the time, I seem to be spinning my wheels, staring blankly at the screen. Worse still, when my brain grinds to a halt, I usually start surfing. Oh sure, I call it "research", but who am I kidding? At the end of the day, have I worked hard? It has taken me years to make tentative peace with my stops and starts during work. Every morning I vow to become a morning person, starting full speed out of the gate. And every morning I daydream, shuffle papers, read e-mail messages and visit blogs, and somehow it is time for lunch. Then, at about 2 p.m., a sense of urgency kicks in, and I write steadily, until about 5 or 6, when I revert to the little-of-this, some-of-that style of the morning.I like that - we just don't know how to measure how hard I am working. But why do we even care? A few companies are taking the concept of “watch what I produce, not how I produce it” even further. At the headquarters of Best Buy in Minneapolis, for instance, the hot policy of the moment is called ROWE, short for Results Only Work Environment.As our work in agriculture looks less and less like what our fathers did, and more and more like desk work, our job satisfaction will depend on being able to see value in how we spend our time. We were strongly indoctrinated to the idea of hard work - we just have lost the ability to discern what hard work is, perhaps. So the next time you see a post about an ocarina quartet, please believe me - I'm working hard for you. Labels: blog, culture, psychology Monday, June 04, 2007
We know the answer to this one...
The ethanol boom is being studied closely to try to get some handle on what the longer term implications for farmers might be. Consider this interesting study by economists at the University of Illinois ["Call us if you can play football! Even a little bit!"]. Once Federal mandates for use of biofuels are reached, ethanol's primary use will be as a substitute for gasoline. As such, the ethanol price will have to be competitive with the gasoline price so that consumers will buy ethanol-blended fuels. Because corn is the major production cost for ethanol, the price an ethanol producer will be willing to pay for corn, hereafter referred to as the break-even corn price, will be directly related to the ethanol price. As the ethanol price increases, the break-even corn price increases. Moreover, ethanol price will be directly related to crude oil price. Therefore, break-even corn prices will be positively related to crude oil prices. As crude oil price increases, the price of gasoline will increase leading to higher ethanol and break-even corn prices. Conversely, decreases in crude oil price will lead to a lower gasoline price, a lower ethanol price, and a lower break-even corn price. [More]There follow neat rows and columns of figures, but the punchline for me was the assumption I have highlighted above: "Once Federal mandates for the use of biofuels are reached". This year will get us to around 6B gpy (gallons per year) on our way to a mandate of 7.5 gpy. But wait, why not just move the goal line? Refiners would be forced to triple their use of fuel ethanol over the next decade, under legislation expected to start moving through the Senate this spring. My perception is at the first sign of markets adjusting to higher corn prices and reducing farmer margins to historic levels, heavy ag lobbying will get the mandate raised. Cash rents, seed, fertilizer, machinery, etc. are already responding to producer liquidity and exercising pricing power. Keep in mind the market still isn't paying the current price for corn right now. End users are still partially feeding off doofs like me who will deliver some $2.50 corn this fall. (I don't want to talk about it!) My suspicion is the input cost spiral will truly take off this winter as almost all of us sell crops with averages starting with threes and sevens. Producer margins will head back to more modest levels and, having tasted better, intense pressure wll arise for lawmakers to deliver. From a politician's point of view, mandates are a beautiful thing, man. You don't need a budget for starters. You simply speak and somebody else has to figure out how to pay for it. Having experienced this magic power once, it will be hard to resist repeating. Especially if the farm bill turns out to be less than a crowd pleaser for your farmer constituents. Getting back to the oil/corn price analysis, such studies make for interesting conversation. But it seems more likely we are in for a punctuated equilibrium model of price evolution - not a smooth curve. [via farmgate]
Is the Bear back?
Russia is "happening" again. Or is it another Potemkin ruse? With international observers watching intently two short-timer leaders will rub shoulders at the G-8 meeting this week. And it looks like Putin has brought an attitude. When President Vladimir Putin delivered a stinging critique of US foreign policy at a security conference in Munich in February, stunned politicians in the audience described it as the most anti-Western speech made by a Russian leader since the Cold War.Putin flat creeps me out. His KGB demeanor and the growing signs of authoritarianism trigger too many old memories for many of us Boomers. Perhaps most irritating is how successful this hardliner has been for the Russian people. Other dangers remain: corruption, the inefficiency of the state apparatus, high levels of social inequity. But generally Russia is in better shape today than seven years ago, when Putin assumed power. Russia now needs more than anything to strengthen law and order and to restore the institutional capacity of the state. Democracy is also needed, but only later, when the rule of law has been established. There is, of course, a danger that the leadership will use political centralization to line everyone up along the ‘vertical of power’ and eliminate opposition in order to live in serene comfort at the citizens’ expense—and perhaps also to embark on the occasional escapade. This has happened in Russia before. But one must choose the lesser of two evils. Strengthening law and order is only possible under a centralized system. Without centralization, there is no chance at all of it happening; unbounded chaos and lawlessness would rule. This seems to be the choice facing Russia today. [More]There was a time children when Russia was our most ardently wooed customer. Friends of mine traveled to the USSR and were seduced by the prospect of long-term trading bonanzas with the Russians. For myself, I couldn't see how their vodka-soaked economy could ever generate any trade wherewithal. But the world's appetite for energy changed all that. And to be fair (or at least make a halfhearted attempt) I'm not sure we really know what energy reserves still lay unrealized in the vast interior of Russia. But there's one place -- Russia -- where reserve estimates just seem to go up and up. In its annual statistical survey of world energy, BP PLC (BP ) has recently revised its estimates of Russia's total proven oil reserves to 69.1 billion barrels, 6% of the world's total, up from 45 billion bbl. in 2001. But according to auditors with a worm's-eye view of what's actually going on in the depths of Siberia, such estimates may just scratch the surface of Russia's real potential. According to a recent study by Dallas-based energy reserve auditors DeGolyer & MacNaughton, whose clients include leading Russian energy companies such as Gazprom and Yukos, Russia's true recoverable reserves are between 150 billion bbl. and 200 billion bbl. That's up from industry estimates of 100 billion bbl. a few years ago.But compared to the extraordinary human effort displayed by the Chinese, Russia is basing its future on extraction - mining, drilling, logging, etc. Simply put they are selling their country watt by watt. Hey - it works for for Saudis. As long as we insist on all the cheap energy we want, the consequences will be supporting governments like Putin's and strong-arm despots who are even worse. Labels: economics, energy, international, trade
One emerging theme...
As I read the op-ed columns and lobbying group papers on the farm bill debate one theme is fairly consistent and we all saw it coming. One problem with the farm bill has been its historical lack of balance. For example, only 39 percent of all U.S. farmers and ranchers received crop subsidies in 2005. These farm-bill subsidies support the growing of commodities such as corn and soybeans, but have little support for fruits and vegetables. Say what you will about the Environmental Working Group, but the power of one guy (yup - that's all) armed with a decent computer, good database skills, and well-run website is formidable. Subsidy proponents simply have been unable to counter these exposed numbers, especially when they contrast significantly with the traditional rhetoric of farm payments. The maldistribution of government money also plays well for those who argue about local producers being short-changed. There's growing demand to change how the subsidies are allocated. Some say it's unfair that commodity growers receive nearly all the money. And there's a push to spend more money helping farmers solve environmental problems and less on direct payments to individuals. [More]Moreover, the breadth of the coverage and interest in the new farm bill seems greater. Opinions are popping up in places that never cared much before. Each year the federal government makes payments worth millions to farmers across the country -- many of whom are massive corporations, not the average family farmer, like Maine farmers. These subsidies promote inefficiency and encourage growers to "game" the system in order to qualify for larger subsidies. [More]This means there could be fewer easily-traded-for votes from urban legislators than in the past. When you don't have many farmers in your district/state, why not swap a farm bill "aye" for a vote that will impact your constituents? That type of thinking may not be as easy to come by anymore. Pressure groups have arguably lowered the "disinterest" in farm payments, I think. The bottom line - if the forces at work in the farm bill debate cannot alter the path of this juggernaut legislation, it could be as close to as close to permanent as the Constitution. But as I mentioned in this week's USFR commentary, a number of small changes (slightly lower payment cap, wider distribution, less market-distorting, etc.) could essentially make our farm program an afterthought for industrial producers in the booming grain business. This Death of a Thousand Cuts is starting to look like the optimal outcome to me. Labels: farm bill, farm program, politics Sunday, June 03, 2007
Great images lift our thoughts...
I have gotten away from posting great photos. ![]() [More] I'm going back. Labels: fun
Flying Eagle Bowling Shot
I'm alla time hearing how I don't post enough bowling videos.
Read the label and weep...
Can't get started in the morning without your can of Diet Pepsi? Be worried. Very worried. What's more, the good and peaceful leaders of Sudan were prepared to retaliate massively: They would cut off shipments of the emulsifier gum arabic, thereby depriving the world of cola.To refresh your chemical memories, gum arabic is umm, well, ... OK, I didn't know either. Gum arabic reduces the surface tension of liquids, which leads to increased fizzing in carbonated beverages. This can be exploited in what is known as a Mentos eruption and can be seen in The Diet Coke & Mentos Challenge. [More]It turns out to be a bluff, however. At least for Coke drinkers. Sudan does continue to supply the world with about 80 percent of its gum arabic. A decade ago, nearly 80 percent of all the gum arabic imported into the United States came from Sudan, but a lot has changed since then.This would be great material to crack wise about except for the complicating factor of hundreds of thousands of dead people at the hands of bozos like Khartoum Karl. Recent attempts by the US to stop the genocide are not exactly airtight either. The administration's list of targeted firms is noteworthy for what it left out.While I welcome every attempt to deal with this ongoing tragedy, the loss of cola seems a relatively small price to pay for saving lives. And if our government doesn't understand yet that perception without substance plays badly in the Information Age, we are due for a change. Still, even a perhaps belated attempt to stop this human catastrophe deserves fair credit. Labels: food, international
Deadline fever...
The end of political careers seems to be sparking some serious effort to get something done on trade - if for no other reason to add to legacies and detract from the w-a-r when historians get to making notes. For Bush, Blair, and even Angela Merkel the "doable" part of their long and mostly unchanging to-do lists is shrinking. The four governments are trying to conclude a framework this month so all 150 WTO members can work out a draft by the end of July. The Bush administration wants to use progress on the global talks to persuade Congress to renew the president's trade negotiating authority, said John Weekes, a trade adviser with Sidley Austin in Geneva.So just when everybody and their Senator are calling for farm policy reform, the US gets religion on trade which will also impact the farm bill significantly? Not if our farm lobby can help it. US farm groups have warned the Bush administration against compromising on farmers' interests as trade negotiators push intensely to broker a new world trade deal under the Doha Round.Ya gotta admire that kind of chtuzpah. Usually a warning contains an explicit "or else this happens" or at least a clear hint of some retaliation. What exactly are farm groups going to do if a deal is brokered that they find unacceptable? Lobby harder? March more farmers to Washington? It's not like we've got veto power or even a vote. And with even farm-state Senators working to scale back farm payments, our "bloc vote" doesn't strike me as very threatening. The concept of special interests "warning" our president is an unfortunate addition in public debate, IMHO. Besides, if we know one thing now, this president doesn't "warn" well. Saturday, June 02, 2007
Advertising faith...
![]() The evolution (?) of the church sign has been a phenomenon of my generation. I have watched and winced as bad puns and quirky theology are displayed on church marquees. Where did this all come from? The pun-laden signs you see outside churches have always intrigued me. "Seven days without prayer makes one weak." "Forbidden fruit creates many jams." "We have a prophet-sharing plan." They're funny and a little bit alien, if you're not a regular churchgoer. And it's hard to tell whether they're intended primarily to amuse regular congregants, or to attract soul-searching passers-by. Whatever the intent, such signs have certainly gained the notice of the secular world at large. There are Web sites devoted to the phenomenon—including one where you can generate your own church sign and another that envisions an amusing "church sign smackdown." And in March, Overlook Press published a book called Church Signs Across America that's being sold in, among other places, the housewares department of hipster-pop emporium Urban Outfitters. The book, by photographers Pam and Steve Paulson, features images from nearly 50 states and shows just how ubiquitous these signs have become. But where did they get their start? [More]Be sure to scroll through the slide show - very interesting. Friday, June 01, 2007
Why I love Denmark...
I have friends in DK and have been there a few times. I love the country and think most American farmers would enjoy visiting them. We have much in common.
Maybe your check won't bounce after all...
A good summary of the condition of Social Security. Labels: economy, finance, policy, retirement
When experiments go wrong...
Sometimes we look for confirmation in nature and get a surprise. The essence of the story, as usually told, goes something like this. In the fall of 1901 J.B. Watson, Chief Engineer at the Tamarack copper mine (S. of Calumet, Mich.) suspended 4250 foot long plumb lines down mineshafts. Measurements showed that the plumb lines were farther apart at the bottom than at the top, contrary to expectations. Thus arose one of the long-standing mysteries of science. [More] The possible explanations include: the Earth is actually a hollow sphere and we live on the inside surface. ![]() The serious explanations are much, much more complicated. Warning: geometry involved. [via BoingBoing]
Even trickles can make a difference...
As the world quietly passes a milestone of becoming more urban than rural, the most rural of all - peasants in China - may slowly be gaining ground. Most of the houses have obviously been newly rebuilt, with brick walls and higher roofs. (Feng Shui and the cost of land may explain why houses stay on the same plots.) This is entirely typical for the area. It's dangerous to generalise about a huge country from anecdotal evidence; still, it is evidence that at least one substantial group of Chinese peasants are doing absolutely better than before, whether or not they are falling relatively behind the city-dwellers. [More and great photos of stuff other than tourist sites] The billions of trade dollars pouring into China are of course being sopped up mostly by a few entrepreneurs (to use the polite word) and a growing middle class in the cities, but to be fair, the Chinese government is taking some steps to help the vast countryside and rural population live better lives. It is both sad and hopeful that only a few dollars can make such a big difference there. Labels: culture, economy, globalization, population US Farm Report host John Phipps surfs the Web so you don't have to...
About MeJan and I farm 1700 acres near Chrisman, IL. I have also written humor and commentary for Farm Journal and Top Producer for 13 years. Please visit my website (www.johnwphipps.com) to learn about my speaking services for your group's next meeting. ARCHIVES
April 2006 /
May 2006 /
June 2006 /
July 2006 /
August 2006 /
September 2006 /
October 2006 /
November 2006 /
December 2006 /
January 2007 /
February 2007 /
March 2007 /
April 2007 /
May 2007 /
June 2007 /
July 2007 /
August 2007 /
September 2007 /
October 2007 /
MORE FROM JOHN
On the Coffee Table |
Farm Journal • Top Producer • Beef Today • Dairy Today • AgDay U.S. Farm Report • Pro Farmer • Pro Farmer Members AgWeb Professional - Subscription Information • Add AgWeb.com to your Favorites FAQ • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Advertise on AgWeb.com Quotes by eSignal • Quotes delayed at least 10 min © Copyright 2006 AgWeb.com a division of Farm Journal, Inc. |
| Home | Agriculture News | Weather | Money & Markets | Ag Discussions | Site Map | |