A recent NPR segment noted that in 2019, farmers got billions in taxpayer subsidies, yet “hardly anyone objected.”
We object. So do the thousands of farmers who didn’t get subsidies—mostly those non-industrial, non-chemical farmers who instead of growing GMO corn and soybeans, grow organic and regenerative, nutrient-dense food for their local communities.
Why? Because as taxpayers, we'd rather support a better kind of farming, the kind that can actually help reverse global warming.
That's why we support a regenerative Green New Deal.
Ellen Brown, founder of the Public Banking Institute and author of 12 books, says that one of the most commonly floated arguments against a Green New Deal is that it will cost too much. She disagrees. In a recent article, she writes:
"It is possible to sequester carbon and restore our collapsing ecosystem using the financial resources we already have, and it can be done while at the same time improving the quality of our food, water, air and general health."
Brown also disagrees with the premise that the one-and-only solution to global warming is to invest in renewable energy technologies.
"Contrary to popular belief, the biggest environmental polluters are not big fossil fuel companies. They are big agribusiness and factory farming, with six powerful food industry giants—Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, Dean Foods, Dow AgroSciences, Tyson and Monsanto (now merged with Bayer)—playing a major role."
If you still have doubts about the affordability of a Green New Deal—or if you’re looking for more help explaining how we can, and must, invest in a Green New Deal—you’ll want to read Brown’s latest article, which ends like this:
"The bottom line is that saving the planet from environmental destruction is not only achievable, but that by focusing on regenerative agriculture and tapping up the central bank for funding, the climate crisis can be addressed without raising taxes and while restoring our collective health."