|
Thumb of Michigan | I rememeber the last time we operated without a sugar program. Sugar went from a US price of around 22 cents up to around 60 cents. We bought a couple of farms and some iron. We were very happy about not having a sugar program. That was in the early 70's sometime. Long term, we might get cheaper sugar w/o a program. I doubt it will make any difference in anyones grocery bill. The sugar program as it operates now has a supposed zero net effect from a taxpayer standpoint. All marketing loans have always been repaid. Different than most other commodity programs work. The sugar program gets debated just like the rest of the farm bill, in congress. Its not all a smoke filled back room kind of deal.
The first articles I read about the buy out had a little different slant than the one Fla Veggie posted. Environmentalists wanted the swamp back for free. Owner thought that was a little cheap. Eventually, they came to terms on a price. Good for everyone is what I say. The swamp comes back starting in (I thinkl) about 7 years.
I participate in both the CRP and CREP prgrams on part of our farm. I see no difference between that and the sugar plant deal. I try to do everything environmentally correct as I know how to. If the public wants more, then I'll do more. For enough money.
What I took as mis reporting was how much of the sugar business nation wide Fanjuls own. I have no doubt that they own a large part of the cane business. I really should have checked stats before I posted, but I didn't. I will later. Last I knew, sugar cane production nationwide has fell below sugar beet production. At least, that was a few years back before Katrina. Nothing was mentioned in the article about corn sweeteners. The article ( I thought) would lead some to believe that Fanjuls had a hand in every pound of sugar produced in the US. Far from true. But again, I should check my facts as I could be off some. | |
|
Sugar Buyout article, Big brown steaming pile!
