Crops are rotting in fields as Trump’s trade war bites US farmers

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
The good news is Trump is setting them up for welfare, rural farmers love that.

American farmers are struggling to sell their products as tariffs introduced during the trade war between Washington and Beijing stifle demand.

In certain states, farmers are being forced into plowing their crops under — effectively burying them under soil in fields — as there is simply not enough storage room in storage facilities.

The problem is most acute for soybean farmers, as China generally buys around 60% of US soybeans, but purchases have basically stopped since tariffs began.
More from Business Insider
 
  • Like
Reactions: VulchR

Baldilocks

macrumors 6502
Jan 2, 2012
414
307
Delaware, USA
He may not be a good President but he wasn’t too far off on forest management. When you let the environmentalists dictate policy, the forests lose.

In places where dead and fallen trees are removed and forests are clean, you’re less likely to have dry fuel to feed a fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
He may not be a good President but he wasn’t too far off on forest management. When you let the environmentalists dictate policy, the forests lose.

In places where dead and fallen trees are removed and forests are clean, you’re less likely to have dry fuel to feed a fire.
To begin with, of the state's 33 million acres of forest, federal agencies, including the Forest Service and the Interior Department, own and manage 57 percent. They've not done anything to remove their part. Additionally, over the last 2 decades global warming and drought have left millions of trees dead and neither the state or federal governments can clear them fast enough, and they are trying.

In the last decade wind speeds have gone up exponentially and drought has been at it's highest levels in recorded history, not just for California but everywhere.

Please, at least know the facts before blaming a global issue on local partisan political talking points.
 

LizKat

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2004
5,348
30,019
Catskill Mountains
Not all doom and gloom. Like most headlines, it is omission as usual.
Looks like Washington needs to look at how they are doling out the subsidies.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/19/us/politics/farming-trump-trade-war.html

Now the question is, will they and how soon.
It's no joke about crops rotting in front of the grain farmers though. Doom and gloom do lie in the costs of vanishing storage options and a frenetic search to locate grain buyers and transport to markets other than Trump's trade-frenemy China. Plus the farmers were put on notice long ago the bailouts were not going to actually cover their losses.

 

Rhonindk

macrumors 68040
Oct 3, 2014
3,780
7,385
watching the birth of the Dem WTH Party
It's no joke about crops rotting in front of the grain farmers though. Doom and gloom do lie in the costs of vanishing storage options and a frenetic search to locate grain buyers and transport to markets other than Trump's trade-frenemy China. Plus the farmers were put on notice long ago the bailouts were not going to actually cover their losses.

And? I didn’t gainsay anything about that. Yet you took it that way?
There is good and bad in this. Going in, in an attempt to rectify the tarriff issue, we knew there would be mistakes and pain points. Let’s get / hope Washington can adjust for these as we move forward.
For other farmers, this has been negligible or a boon.
We need to look at this in perspective not cry and scream OMG!!!!!
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,387
UK
He may not be a good President but he wasn’t too far off on forest management. When you let the environmentalists dictate policy, the forests lose.

In places where dead and fallen trees are removed and forests are clean, you’re less likely to have dry fuel to feed a fire.
Yes because the environmentalists don’t know how to manage forests...
 

mudslag

macrumors regular
Oct 18, 2010
139
10,022
Fires help replenish the area, they are a natural and needed part for the death and rebirth of those ecosystems. Specially in places like Cali wilderness.
 

LizKat

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2004
5,348
30,019
Catskill Mountains
And? I didn’t gainsay anything about that. Yet you took it that way?
There is good and bad in this. Going in, in an attempt to rectify the tarriff issue, we knew there would be mistakes and pain points. Let’s get / hope Washington can adjust for these as we move forward.
For other farmers, this has been negligible or a boon.
We need to look at this in perspective not cry and scream OMG!!!!!
"Perspective" doesn't include suggesting that there's omission of information by media simply because headlines about tariffs are negative. The facts about tariff hikes are negative as well, unless one listens solely to Donald Trump and Peter Navarro in this administration.

For instance, the routes soybeans take from harvest to final destination are disrupted globally, producing new market inefficiencies. Brazil and Argentina --which also produce soybeans-- are now importing more American soybeans, exporting the ones they grow to China and using the imports to make oils and meal for domestic consumption.

https://www.axios.com/soybean-tariffs-new-shipping-route-3ae02f6c-4b9f-4435-8eb1-e5601f5d2e77.html
 

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
10,029
Lots of conservatives voted blue where I live. Farmers. Even local town-favorite conservatives loose.
 

mudslag

macrumors regular
Oct 18, 2010
139
10,022
Not in California they don’t. They’re more worried about preserving habitat than actually clearing what should be cleared.

Given the vast size, it's impossible to have control over that ecosystem. Nature still has the upper hand, no matter how much you think we have the ability to control it.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,094
16,638
The Misty Mountains
He may not be a good President but he wasn’t too far off on forest management. When you let the environmentalists dictate policy, the forests lose.

In places where dead and fallen trees are removed and forests are clean, you’re less likely to have dry fuel to feed a fire.
As if they don’t lose when they are all clear cut? :rolleyes: The bolded above is not true, there is a learning curve and over the decades forest management philosophy has changed to recognize that you have to be more proactive in allowing smaller fires and harvesting wood in a smart way.
[doublepost=1542895231][/doublepost]
Given the vast size, it's impossible to have control over that ecosystem. Nature still has the upper hand, no matter how much you think we have the ability to control it.
I’m not countering your statement, Nature always has the upper hand. If we clear cut all of the forrests around civilization, this would eliminate some of the threat, although I am not advocating that, but some people see the environment as a commodity to be used up and sold for profit. Humans do have the ability to disrupt local ecosystems by cutting down all of the trees. However in some places like Southern California, much of the landscape is covered by burnable scrub. That is a more expensive problem to control, because no one wants to cut or burn that because there is no real money to be made on timber.
 
Last edited:

laptech

macrumors 6502
Apr 26, 2013
307
392
Earth
US farmers are not very good business people then if China is the only country in the world where they can sell their produce. The world is made up of many hundreds of countries but yet rather than do the hard thing of trying to work out new trade deals with other countries, they would rather destroy their crops.
 

LizKat

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2004
5,348
30,019
Catskill Mountains
US farmers are not very good business people then if China is the only country in the world where they can sell their produce. The world is made up of many hundreds of countries but yet rather than do the hard thing of trying to work out new trade deals with other countries, they would rather destroy their crops.
Oh so now you're putting the folly of a president's notions about trade deficits into the blame category of the farmers. Nice try. No sale. You forget it was not either the farmers, dealers, shippers nor ultimate purchasers who said oh hey why let the marketplace deal with grain trade or trade in anything else for that matter, let's engage in a trade war instead because (as Trump claimed) they're so easy to win. So someone's winning now, right? Lemme see... [crickets]
 

laptech

macrumors 6502
Apr 26, 2013
307
392
Earth
Oh so now you're putting the folly of a president's notions about trade deficits into the blame category of the farmers. Nice try. No sale. You forget it was not either the farmers, dealers, shippers nor ultimate purchasers who said oh hey why let the marketplace deal with grain trade or trade in anything else for that matter, let's engage in a trade war instead because (as Trump claimed) they're so easy to win. So someone's winning now, right? Lemme see... [crickets]
So rather than adapt and overcome the situation to try and find other avenues to sell their crops, farmers are just going to sit on their backsides and say 'sorry, nothing we can do, it's all trumps fault' and trump haters are going to support them..utter rubbish.

When the going get's tough, you don't go and have a hissy fit and go on the blame game, you adapt and overcome. Something farmers and their supports know nothing about it appears.

Lets all blame trump for ruining our crops, trump you crop killer you. (says sarcastically)