[seiferteric]

If we just didn't subsidize its production, that would be a start.

[pengaru]

Sure, but if the alternative is banning which is never a good approach, taxing it makes a lot more sense IMHO.

I'm no agriculture nerd but isn't much of the US particularly well suited to growing corn, regardless of subsidies?

[kube-system]

It's a tough situation. Much of the idea behind agriculture subsides is to protect against black-swan events.

[Dylan16807]

We could direct the subsidies more toward ethanol or whatever other corn product, and still be able to get to the raw corn in an emergency.

[seiferteric]

Doesn't crop insurance exist? Why the need to constantly subsidize?

[kube-system]

You can't eat insurance money.

We are lucky to live in a age of a dramatic global decline in famine, but a large scale war or natural disaster could potentially unravel this progress in a devastating way.

Subsidies can do preventative tasks that insurance cannot -- like securing additional capacity of food stores and farm land that farmers wouldn't normally do unless they were being paid to do so.

[seiferteric]

True, but the US gov't stockpiles grain, oil and other things for those kind of events. I don't see how subsidies help in those scenarios either.

[kube-system]

Yes, but much like the PPE stockpile, those are only a stopgap measure and aren't really enough to be a comprehensive solution on their own.