They're Playing That Tune Again

From Keith Good's Farm Policy, excerpting from a Chris Clayton interview of the House Ag chief:

Mr. Clayton added that, “Peterson wants to reorganize USDA next year that will include emphasizing computer overhauls in major agencies such as the Farm Service Agency and the Risk Management Agency. Peterson said whoever takes the mantle at USDA needs to focus heavily on upgrading the computer systems and using software vendors that understand agricultural lending and risk management.

“Peterson added that he also thinks there are serious changes needed at RMA, particularly regarding how overall policy is created at the agency and implemented between the headquarter in Washington and satellite office in Kansas City, Mo.

Been there, done that, thoroughly disillusioned.

Bottomline--there's too many moving parts in USDA with too little forceful leadership. Add in a group of second-guessers (OMB and GAO, especially) and it's practically impossible to achieve the goals he wants.

Geezer Is Amazed by Advances: Seed Size??

Excerpt from the most recent farmgate:

"If you buy the new Roundup Ready 2 Yield seed beans, you are buying a bag with a specific number of beans inside, not bags with a uniform weight. That is the industry trend, says MO Extension’s Bill Wiebold, who says you will get 140,000 beans, but not necessarily 50 lbs. of seed. Wiebold says a seed size of 2,800/lb. is about average, but seed size will vary by variety and will vary due to environmental conditions.

The constant number of seeds per bag will not be welcomed by those farmers who buy smaller seeds, believing they will be able to plant more acres with fewer bags of seed beans. Those farmers may resist the change, says MO agronomist Bill Wiebold. But he says knowing the number of seeds per bag allows more precise calibration of planters.

The size of seed beans is not as important as yield potential and pest resistance says Wiebold, who says seed size does not affect emergence percentage, seedling vigor, or yield potential. But he says smaller seeds have less reserves, and planting depth is more critical. Read more."

No comment, I'm speechless.

Innovation in DOD, Wikis Even

A piece at Nextgov describes DOD's use of wikis during the Russian/Georgian war.

The Times and Farmers

I missed my hardcopy Times today, but the website has this article talking about Texas farmers who failed to sell their wheat at $10, and the effects now. Some reference to the boom of the 70's., but land prices are less than $1000.

Most Surprising Headline Today

Salt Lake County, Utah, Goes for Obama

From the Post blog.

Mathematical Illiteracy in the AP

From an article on this document from ERS:

50 percent more US children went hungry in 2007

By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN – 3 days ago

Some 691,000 children went hungry in America sometime in 2007, while close to one in eight Americans struggled to feed themselves adequately even before this year's sharp economic downtown, the Agriculture Department reported Monday.

The department's annual report on food security showed that during 2007 the number of children who suffered a substantial disruption in the amount of food they typically eat was more than double the 430,000 in 2006 and the largest figure since 716,000 in 1998.

Note the headline is accurate, but the writer is not (i.e 691,000 is not double the 430,000). When you look at the ERS study, the 2005 figure for children was close to the 2007, making me suspicious of the accuracy of the 2006 figure. In general, the ERS study doesn't indicate dramatic changes in "food insecurity".

My Memory Isn't Too Bad

Despite the gloom and doom, I've had the feeling we've had comparable crashes before. Turns out to be true, though this one is faster. And granted the economic situation isn't reflected in this graph.

New Yorker and Food

The New Yorker magazine has its food issue this week. James Surowiecki, their economics correspondent, discusses food prices.

His thesis is that, over the last 20 years or so, agricultural production and marketing systems, particularly in developing countries, have been made more efficient, with fewer agricultural marketing boards, more production driven by the market and less by government subsidy, lower or no levels of government-owned grain reserves, etc. But, while the systems are more efficient, they are more fragile. He writes:

"The old emphasis on food security was undoubtedly costly, and often wasteful. But the redundancies it created also had tremendous value when things went wrong. And one sure thing about a system as complex as agriculture is that things will go wrong, often with devastating consequences."

It's an interesting contrast with Prof. Pollan's thesis which says that government subsidies have distorted production, and made corn cheap.

Farm Bill Blues in the EU Too

The greens were disturbed with the outcome of our 2008 farm bill process. Apparently similar forces are also at work in the EU--apparently the resolution of the EU CAP (common agricultural policy) "health check" debate is for very minor moves of money from income support/direct payments to conservation and minor reductions of the biggest payments.

An Economist Bureaucrat Is Still a Bureaucrat

Brad DeLong has a recommendation for Austan Goolsbee, which reflects his experience in the bureaucracy:

As a non-negotiable condition of his taking the job, Austan should insist on at least his two deputies—the other two members of the CEA—having offices inside the Eisenhower EOB. Six eyes can cover three times as much ground as two, and a surprisingly large share of the business of government is done by wandering around the Eisenhower building and the White House talking to people in hallways (or just hanging out in the Starbucks at 17th and Pennsylvania and talking to whoever comes by

I agree. Things may have changed a little bit with modern technology, but nothing fully replaces hanging out.