One thought on “NYTimes: Drought cheaper than energy taxes for farmers”
Typical NYTimes malarkey.
First, all grasslands have periods of drought. It’s part of their ecology. In the US, the farther west you go, the more erratic rainfall is and always has been, which is why this region is all about grazing cattle and irrigation.
Second, crop insurance should really be a private operation. The actuaries do their best predicting and rate the risk. The farmers pay the premium and pass the cost to consumers through grain sales. If an area’s drought risk exceeds its agricultural value, the premium is too high for the farmer to sell at a profit and the land goes to other uses.
Third, carbon taxes will achieve as much for the environment as Al Gore has, but will drain wealth.
Typical NYTimes malarkey.
First, all grasslands have periods of drought. It’s part of their ecology. In the US, the farther west you go, the more erratic rainfall is and always has been, which is why this region is all about grazing cattle and irrigation.
Second, crop insurance should really be a private operation. The actuaries do their best predicting and rate the risk. The farmers pay the premium and pass the cost to consumers through grain sales. If an area’s drought risk exceeds its agricultural value, the premium is too high for the farmer to sell at a profit and the land goes to other uses.
Third, carbon taxes will achieve as much for the environment as Al Gore has, but will drain wealth.