Proof That Our Agriculture Subsidies Are Munged

Growers Reap Benefits Even in Good Years: Crops That Sell High Qualify for Payments

My previous post on farm subsidies being out of control really was an under-estimation of the real cost to us taxpayers. We should probably demand a refund of our tax dollars since the money has gone to supplement farmers (like the one noted below) that made 15 times the average annual income of the average worker in the US... and at least $75,000 of that was tax free, which is strange since those of us collecting unemployment (a contributed sum of money) have to pay taxes on that as "regular income." Go figure.

Roger L. Richardson, a vigorous 72-year-old who grows corn on 1,500 acres of prime Eastern Shore farmland, had a good year in 2005. Thanks to smart planning, shrewd investing and a little luck, he grossed a healthy $500,000 for his crop.

But the federal government treated him as if he needed help and paid him $75,000.

The money came from a little-known, 20-year-old U.S. Agriculture Department program that was intended to boost farmers' incomes when prices are low.

The farmers do not have to sell at distressed prices to collect the money. They can bank the government payments and sell when prices are higher.

Since September, the program has cost taxpayers $4.8 billion. Most of that money -- $3.8 billion -- went to farmers such as Richardson who sold at higher prices, according to a Washington Post analysis of USDA payment data.