Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Keep CounterPunch ad free. Support our annual fund drive today!

Got Farms?


“This, in brief, is the bad news: the food and agriculture policies you’ve inherited — designed to maximize production at all costs and relying on cheap energy to do so — are in shambles, and the need to address the problems they have caused is acute.”

(A letter to the) Farmer in Chief, Michael Pollan, 10/9/08

This week, the Maine legislature’s Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee held a “Public Forum on Milk Pricing Forecasts and the Dairy Stabilization Program.” The present “milk subsidy” system has for several years slowed the collapse of Maine dairy farming. But the program is now “facing extensive cuts,” even as market prices to farmers tumble.

Lewiston Sun Journal reporter Rebekah Metzler notes that milk prices are “set nationally based on world markets.” Maine’s tiered subsidy scheme attempts to guarantee “a certain price for … milk.” Yet even this modest income support is “based on estimates of how much it takes a dairy farmer in Maine to break even, not to make a profit.” It appears that this frayed life-line is now in peril.

Such news items can appear dry and depressing. Media sources tend to prefer up-beat stories about Community Supported Agriculture, the virtues of maginal increases in local food purchasing, and the increasing farm sector penetration by the “officially non-profit sector.” But despite the usual happy-talk, habitual eaters ought to be getting concerned. Though Maine may have bucked the trend officially, the 2007 Census of Agriculture reveals that since the last tally, 16.2 million acres of American farmland has been taken out of production.

As farmers give up the economic battle, nationwide, 2 acres of farmland are lost to “development” every minute. That’s 120 acres an hour, 2,880 acres a day. Worse, American Farmland Trust reports that, “Our food is increasingly in the path of development.” Ag census figures reveal that “86 percent of US fruits and vegetables, and 63 percent of our dairy products are produced in urban-influenced areas.”

There’s no particular mystery about why farmers quit farming — in the Maine dairy sector anyway. The numbers don’t work. As directed by law, the Maine Milk Commission, in concert with the state university’s economists periodically calculate what it costs to produce 100 pounds of milk here. The best kept open secret in the exercise is that the cost-of-production (COP) numbers are restricted to a “short term/ break even” limitation: No return on capital invested, no mortgage payment figured in — just feed, fuel, repairs, electricity for the milking machines and the bulk tank, etc.

Orono economist George Criner recited the updated (though still unofficial) Maine dairy COP to me. They are (by farm size): Small, $24.51/hundred, Medium, $21.24/ hundred, Large, $20.23. Again, these numbers just barely keep the barn lights on. They don’t pay for the barn.

Currently, Class I (milk for bottling) is bringing $14.99, and Class II (for processing) $10.33. At these prices, a small dairy operation is losing at least $9.52 on every “hundred weight” produced, while a larger outfit may lose “only” $5.24. Projections for 2009 forecast Class I prices wandering around between $13 and $17. In the comparative boom time of 2008, market prices briefly darted to a monthly high of $24.22 before settling back into the teens and low twenties.

This beggaring of family farm agriculture has been going on for decades, and maybe for that reason it’s seen as quite unremarkable. Moreover, it’s often assumed that it’s always been this way.

But in November ‘08, Jay Greathouse, Director of the Willie Nelson Peace Research Institute published an heretical essay suggesting that it wasn’t WWII but something called “parity pricing” of agricultural commodities that actually pulled the USA out of the Great Depression. He argued that a return to such policies might yet avert another looming depression and that, “Supporting family farms can put the US back on a secure economic foundation.”

I was intrigued and this week, posed a number of questions to Mr. Greathouse. His responses follow:

RR) You say that American agricultural policy is “killing the goose that lays the golden egg.” Please explain.

JG) Once upon a time everyone had to hunt and gather to feed themselves. This went on for a very long time until some people figured out how to produce more food than they themselves consumed. It was only this increased human food productivity that enabled civilization, literally “citizens” who “lived in cities” to even exist.

Civilization’s most fundamental challenge from its very beginning involved feeding its citizens. Of all the wonderful things civilization has accomplished cities have not yet been able to self-sufficiently feed their inhabitants.

Indeed, civilization would not be possible without people first developing the ability to produce more food than they themselves consumed. Call these people the first family farmers if you will. Civilization is built upon family farms. The dark side of all of this seems to be that civilization then followed the path to most efficiently and inexpensively separate the producers from their produce, … through industrialization and financialization, becoming a predator upon family farms. The explosive growth of financialized and industrialized civilization during the last 200 years proved devastating to family farms. The very foundation of civilization has become vastly eroded, especially here in the USA, over a startlingly brief period of time.

RR) You’ve written about the country’s moving from “parity pricing” of farm products to “export-oriented pricing” decades ago. What is parity pricing? What was its effect on farmers and eaters? How has “export-oriented pricing” led to factory farms?

JG) Parity pricing is a simple guarantee to farmers that their costs will be covered. Parity pricing basically insures that the most productive segment of society stays employed. This in turn nourishes the economy literally from the soil up with family farm spending power while providing the raw materials needed by manufacturing which then opens up another whole round of productive opportunities at that level. But empowering farmers is the last thing industrialists and financiers want. Export-oriented pricing is a euphemism for an institutional agenda designed to depopulate farming communities and drive the displaced population into cities as cheap factory labor and perpetually indebted consumers. Driving down the price of agricultural products serves the means and ends of industry and finance. The factory farms can only (profit from) exported-oriented pricing by using cheap energy and then (reaping) greater corporate rewards ..(through) increased industrialization and financialization.

To be continued….

RICHARD RHAMES is a dirt-farmer in Biddeford, Maine (just north of the Kennebunkport town line). He can be reached at:


RICHARD RHAMES is a dirt-farmer in Biddeford, Maine (just north of the Kennebunkport town line). He can be reached at:

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine


Weekend Edition
October 28, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Inside the Invisible Government; War, Propaganda, Clinton & Trump
Andrew Levine
The Hillary Era is Coming: Worry!
Gary Leupp
Seven World-Historical Achievements of the Iraq Invasion of 2003
Paul Street
Standing Rock Water-Protectors Waterboarded While the Cleveland Indians Romped
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel: 1984 Everlasting
Michael Brenner
American Foreign Policy in the Post-Trump Era
Luciana Bohne
Crossing the Acheron: Back to Vietnam
Robert Hunziker
The Political Era of Climate Refugees
Stephen Cooper
Alabama’s Last Execution was an Atrocity
Pete Dolack
Work Harder So Speculators Can Get More
Joyce Nelson
Canadians Launch Constitutional Challenge Against CETA
John Laforge
US Uranium Weapons Have Been Used in Syria
Paul Edwards
The Vision Thing ’16
Arshad Khan
Hillary, Trump and Sartre: How Existentialism Disrobes the Major Presidential Candidates
Peter Lee
It’s ON! Between Duterte and America
Joseph Grosso
Starchitects in the City: Vanity Fair and Gentrification
Patrick Carr
Economic Racial Disparity in North Carolina
David Swanson
Public vs. Media on War
Chris Gilbert
Demo Derby in Venezuela: The Left’s New Freewheeling Politics
Binoy Kampmark
Nobel Confusion: Ramos-Horta, Trump and World Disorder
Stephen Cooper
Alabama’s Last Execution Was an Atrocity
Binoy Kampmark
Nobel Confusion: Ramos-Horta, Trump and World Disorder
Russell Mokhiber
Lucifer’s Banker: Bradley Birkenfeld on Corporate Crime in America
Ron Jacobs
Death to the Fascist Insect! The SLA and the Cops
Cesar Chelala
Embargo on Cuba is an Embarrassment for the United States
Jack Smith
And the Winner Is….
Ken Knabb
Beyond Voting: the Limits of Electoral Politics
Matt Peppe
An Alternate Narrative on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
James Rothenberg
Water Under the Bridge
Louis Yako
Remembering Rasul Gamzatov: The Poet of the People
Brian Cloughley
The US, NATO and the Pope
Louis Proyect
The Outsider-Insider: Isaac Babel’s Big Mistake
Martin Billheimer
Now and Then, Ancient Sorceries
October 27, 2016
Paul Street
An Identity-Politicized Election and World Series Lakefront Liberals Can Love
Matthew Stevenson
Sex and the Presidential City
Jim Kavanagh
Tom Hayden’s Haunting
CJ Hopkins
The Pathologization of Dissent
Mike Merryman-Lotze
The Inherent Violence of Israel’s Gaza Blockade
Robert Fisk
Is Yemen Too Much for the World to Take?
Shamus Cooke
Stopping Hillary’s Coming War on Syria
Jan Oberg
Security Politics and the Closing of the Open Society
Ramzy Baroud
The War on UNESCO: Al-Aqsa Mosque is Palestinian and East Jerusalem is Illegally Occupied
Colin Todhunter
Lower Yields and Agropoisons: What is the Point of GM Mustard in India?
Norman Pollack
The Election: Does It Matter Who Wins?
Nyla Ali Khan
The Political and Cultural Richness of Kashmiriyat