Try the political quiz

550 Replies

@5QQP2B7Democratfrom District of Columbia  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only to the extent that those farms provide foods and grains to third world countries, where children and the elderly die from hunger and starvation.

@5RK62N5Libertarianfrom Florida  answered…2yrs

No, instead the government should buy the crops that would otherwise not have been grown, and should give these crops to feed the hungry (in place of foreign aid and domestic food stamps).

@5TDJGGYConstitutionfrom Ohio  answered…2yrs

Commercial companies paid farmers to plant what they wanted or not plant at all. Thus, instead of real farming where there is a rotation of various crops, which would always re-nourish the ground, the ground is now like the dust-bowl of the early 2oth century. So, if the government were to pay the farmer it should be to first nourish the ground and then to plant a rotative selection of plants that would continue the helping and enriching of the soil.

@5VP5V2QGreenfrom Pennsylvania  answered…2yrs

No. Governments should offer different alternatives to help thrive the agricultural process. such as introducing bees to raise instead to help pollinate for stronger and healther crops, along with helping to reduce water consumption

@dnilasorDemocratfrom Illinois  answered…2yrs

Only Black and Hispanic Farmers. Real Hispanic and not people that look White.

@5TWN9ZVRepublicanfrom Pennsylvania  answered…2yrs

We need to realize that most unhealthy and uncontrollable condition occur within large factory farms and also realize what their unfair size advantage means to small business. This is a case of survival of the greediest not fittest. "Greediest" also referring to its over consuming American customers. We all consume way more than needed making us the cause in so many ways as well

@68B3G75Democratfrom New York  answered…2yrs

This is a stupid question. Humanity as a whole should be invested in the idea that no one should ever be hungry...ever.

@5S6HBX3Democratfrom New Jersey  answered…2yrs

Yes, and give power back to farmers and away from big food corporations and deny subsides to farmers who don't grow any crops

@5R8X8D3Greenfrom California  answered…2yrs

Factory Farms are unethical and should never be subsidized by the government. They should be regulated though.

@5R3RZGZGreenfrom Wisconsin  answered…2yrs

Yes, and bring back the strategic grain reserve in a growing program to buffer exports, humanitarian aid, and our own food supply against climate disaster.

@5WD2QBDRepublicanfrom California  answered…2yrs

No because it politicizes nutrition which is why Americans are all overweight.

@5QZK9BRConstitutionfrom Arizona  answered…2yrs

No reason why farmers can not grow food all year long. There's people all over the world in need of food. The children can not eat money, but they can eat fresh produce, and their Country pay's Our Farmers to grow it!

@9XQR29ZLibertarian from Iowa disagreed…9mos

First of all, there is this thing called winter, farmers can't grow year long and as far as I know almost always have a single crop a year. Throwing money at farmers does give incentive for increased production, however that is not necessarily a good thing. Competitive markets, such as farming, will produce the most beneficial output without government intervention, assuming farmers are taxed based on their contribution to pollution and deforestation.

@5SCS4WLDemocratfrom District of Columbia  answered…2yrs

Small, organic vegetable farms to provide close, safe farms to every community. Stop subsidizing Corn! Increase seed variety by reversing patents on nature.

@6478XKWLibertarianfrom New York  answered…2yrs

@5RSVQLMLibertarianfrom California  answered…2yrs

On one hand, the government has no right to play favorites, on the other hand, it sounds like it could ruin the US agriculture industry.

@5SJW3VXRepublicanfrom Kentucky  answered…2yrs

It's hard to form an opinion on this because of corporate/government involvement, and the extent they have killed independent farmers.

@67H6H5MRepublicanfrom Texas  answered…2yrs

Pay farmers to NOT grow food while people in the US go to bed without food? That sounds unAmerican and just plain retarded.

@5W7JD7BDemocratfrom New York  answered…2yrs

@danhughesDemocratfrom North Carolina  answered…2yrs

Government should stimulate / support business when needed. Food security is a nation security issue and should be considered as such.

@5QH3T55Democratfrom Colorado  answered…2yrs

Regardless, we (as a country) should be working toward not producing food in so much excess. We should be producing and stocking stores with food based on supply and demand rather than constantly having everything fully stocked. This will reduce food waste and will reduce the amount of subsidies needed by farmers in the first place as they will not have to supply nearly as much product on a regular basis.

@5QMGH5GDemocratfrom California  answered…2yrs

I think the answer lies in between a lot of these answers. Yes give the farmers an incentive to bring on new methods, such as organic farming, or using wind technology, or drip irrigation rather than irrigation canals as they do in the San Joaquin Valley, where I grew up. Also, make it where there is a food bank to give away food that is not sold and is going to go bad to poor people. I live below the poverty level and would love to have more fresh fruit and vegetables, especially organic

@5TG5775Greenfrom Colorado  answered…2yrs

Yes, and invest in development, and poverty alleviation, in rural areas.

@5R943FDDemocratfrom Missouri  answered…2yrs

Yes, but subsidize more crops that are conducive with more healthy lifestyles. Try to cut back on so many simple sugars.

@5QR25NTRepublicanfrom Texas  answered…2yrs

We need to promote the use of plant-based diet! When people eat more plant-based foods, farmers will likely be more successful.

@5RKV356Democratfrom Rhode Island  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only to incentivize environmental friendly strategies, not income support.

@5R7LDC3Republicanfrom Pennsylvania  answered…2yrs

@5T4YY8BDemocratfrom California  answered…2yrs

All long standing subsidy programs should be abolished - and a new "blind" program instituted based on what important crops require government subsidy

@5SCCH4RRepublicanfrom Indiana  answered…2yrs

@B4LGNR8Democrat from Indiana answered…2wks

Yes, but primarily farmers growing plant food that will be fed to humans, not cattle.

@Daniel-Barton-Je…Libertarian from New York answered…3wks

Any person, group or business that wants to be subsidized can but Any person, group or business that doesn’t want to be subsidized doesn’t have to be, in that case let the free markets run it’s natural normal course for those who don’t want to be subsidized at all , & add subsidizing in the market for those individual people, companies , & groups that want it. Let the free will of individuals decide on that.

@nicolevortizPeace and Freedom from New Jersey answered…2yrs

@9JVRM7JTranshumanist from Tennessee answered…2yrs

Yes, but only small local farms instead of large corporations and make GMOs illegal. Also restrict some agricultural patents

@Benjamin-Shaplei…Democrat from Arkansas answered…2yrs

Yes, but that's at the discretion of the intent of Congress to subsidize; i.e. to have cheap affordable foods for Americans, or to bolster our output to foreign starving nations.

@9JC8CZZSocialist from Florida answered…2yrs

@9HYLPL5Veteran from Idaho answered…2yrs

@9HJZKK2Democrat from Nevada answered…2yrs

Yes, but they should ensure that they do not go to farmers who do not grow crops.

@9H4X266Communist from Pennsylvania answered…2yrs

@9H4NB48Democrat from Mississippi answered…2yrs

Yes, but allow excess and gov subsidy purchases for low income and food bank use. The amount we can produce makes hunger a sin and embarassment.

@9H4MZJ3Veteran from Texas answered…2yrs

@9GZLKSSDemocrat from Texas answered…2yrs

No, farm subsidies should be handled at the state level and should be dependant on the efforts and products that are being created by the farm

@9GTZB7HGreen from California answered…2yrs

@9GS7YNPWomen’s Equality from New Jersey answered…2yrs

This issue should be held at state level rather than federal. The gov should not intervene with the free market unless very necessary.

@reecebiddleIndependentfrom Indiana  answered…2yrs

Yes, but subsidies should only go toward plant agriculture, not animal agriculture

@9GQW762Democrat from Tennessee answered…2yrs

Yes, but priority should go to small farms with affirmative action, and reduce waste

@9GQFBH7Working Family from Ohio answered…2yrs


The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart...