Just to put your subsidy comments in proper perspective, last year the grand
total of our government program receipts amounted to less than 0.5% of our
total farm income. 100% of that amount was from the corn program and for
our operation it is the monetary maximum that any single entity can receive.
It's also less than 4% of our non-officer/owner wages. And it's less than
18% of our fuel bill. It's not a lot of money and we receive the maximum.
It might buy a fancy pickup truck, but it sure wouldn't swing my vote.

I've never advocated farm subsidies. For those who depend on them, they
produce a false economy that can cause them to spend and expand during
markets when they should be contracting and conserving. In recent years the
cash payments from most programs have been drastically cut in favor of low
interest loans and crop insurance premium programs. Have a building blow
down? Don't have insurance? They'll give you a low interest loan. (why
didn't you have insurance on your building?) Heavily financed and your bank
demands crop insurance? They'll help you with the insurance premium BUT be
warned, you'll have to insure ALL your crops... and good luck trying to
collect if you have a disaster. huge $ Nowadays, if you're dependent upon
any kind of farm subsidy, you're probably farming off your credit cards and
aren't long for the farming world anyway.

I understand that the subsidy's to the ethanol plants for construction and
initial operation are all but over. They'll get a real welcoming into the
real world soon.

Jim



"AES" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
Jay Honeck wrote:

"There is thus a net energy loss of about 54,000 Btu for every gallon
(18.9 MJ for every kilogram) of EtOH produced. Unlike the old joke
about the tailor who claims he loses money on every suit, but stays in
business by 'making up for it in quantity', there is no deception
here. It's a losing proposition."

You can read the whole article he
http://www.energyadvocate.com/etohscam.htm

Write your Congress Critters. The politicians are leading us down
this path for purely political purposes, and it's up to us to stop it.
--
Jay Honeck

As a reality-based rather than faith-based individual myself, I'm
genuinely delighted to have you post this, Jay. Agrees exactly with
what I hear from scientific colleagues. But just who are the villains
here?

* Farm-subsidy-addicted Midwest voters?

* The politicians they elect?

* Big corporate firms like ADM, who'll gladly accept (and defend)
similar subsidies, even while knowing full well that they're
absolutely undeserved, and while spouting free market rhetoric in
all directions?

* The politicians they bribe?

* The Bush/Cheney administration, with its near-endless record of
suppressing scientific reality in any and every area where they
find the facts inconvenient?

* The voters who elected them?

Lots of villains around -- not all of them politicians