(The Epoch Times)—The United States has nearly 2 million active farms, and researchers say the existing agricultural model could feed 146 percent of the population by 2030. Nevertheless, the United States imported close to $205 million in food products last year, according to the Department of Agriculture (USDA).
It’s another milestone in the more than decade-long trend of increasing reliance on food imports. Historically, this has been blamed on everything from high volumes of food waste to a booming population, but insiders say profitability is the main roadblock keeping America reliant on foreign foods.
“I think the biggest problem is not the model, but growing season, economics, profits, [and] market demand,” David Anderson, professor and extension specialist for livestock and food product marketing at Texas A&M University, told The Epoch Times.
When asked what would need to change in the U.S. agricultural model to pivot toward growing more crops for domestic consumption, Anderson said: “I think we can physically grow more vegetables, but are they what people want, when they want them, and at a profitable price? Marketing windows prevent some crops from being profitably grown.
“We often have higher costs than crops from other countries.”
Major agricultural producers such as Mexico, China, Brazil, and India have looser regulations, long growing seasons, and cheap labor, making a lot of the production costs cheaper than in the United States. That’s why imported food has generally been cheaper than its domestic competition.
“Farmers produce what is most profitable,” Anderson said.
“Profits are not only determined by price and production costs but what they can actually grow. Not all crops can be grown everywhere.
“Sometimes I can grow a crop but can’t grow it for a profitable price. The yields might be too low or too inconsistent.”
Double-Edged Sword
Troubles turning a profit have led to a sharp decline in homegrown fruits and vegetables over the past few decades. The USDA has observed steady growth in imported fresh produce since the mid-1990s.
In a 2024 interview with NTD News, the president of the Carolina Farm Trust, Zack Wyatt, highlighted how a lack of profitability, foreign competition, and a lack of subsidies have essentially crushed the domestic produce market.
“It feels like the system incentivizes small farmers to go out of business,” Wyatt said. “The more reliant we are on importing food, the more we’re reliant on power. If we can’t feed ourselves, what happens next?”
However, Anderson pointed out that trying to scale up domestic production and decrease reliance on imports is a double-edged sword.
“Imports make food cheaper for consumers,” he said. “If we were to ban or curtail food imports, we would find a lot more seasonality in our food choices at the store. Imports allow us to have year-round supplies of many fruits and vegetables. I think that is good for consumers too.”
The United States imported nearly $30 million in fruit and more than $21 million in vegetables last year, according to USDA research. In a 10-year snapshot, it marks a sharp increase from the less than $16 million in fruit and $11 million in vegetables imported in 2015.
But the soaring imports aren’t limited to fresh produce. The volume of foreign grains, meat, and dairy entering the United States has also risen in the past 10 years.
Moreover, Anderson pointed out that not all U.S. produce is grown for direct consumption, but for other products. He gave the example of domestically produced tomatoes, many of which go into other items such as sauces or soups, cutting down on the number of actual tomatoes available to meet fresh market demand.
Millions of acres of American farmland are dedicated to crops grown for ethanol and seed oils. Roughly 40 percent of U.S. corn production is for ethanol and other products. Additional crops are grown for “oilseed” purposes, like soybeans, rapeseed, palm, and sunflowers. Soybeans alone account for more than 80 million acres of U.S. cropland and represent 90 percent of total domestic oilseed production.
At the end of the day, Anderson said, what producers grow is dictated by dollars and cents.
“We might grow a lot more things if [market] prices were high enough. But that creates a problem for consumers: To get the price high enough to produce them would mean few could afford them.”
Aaron Ristow, senior agricultural specialist at American Farmland Trust, also thinks high input costs keep American farmers from scaling up domestic food production.
“Other countries don’t have to pay as much, so their products can be bought cheaper here. I think we’re able to compete, but the cheaper labor and lack of regulations other countries have would be a threat,” Ristow told The Epoch Times.
Working with farmers in New York, Ristow said there’s no shortage of hurdles to increasing domestic food production.
“There’s things like extreme weather conditions. Even if we’re getting the same amount of rainfall, we get extended dry periods, then a lot of intense rain suddenly. The runoff and erosion are problematic and can wipe out crops,” he said.
Ristow noted that farms are increasingly under fire from urban expansion. He said that many farmers deal with consistent complaints about the noise of farm machinery and the smell of animals.
“People buy a house because they like the views of the countryside, but they don’t like the smell of manure or getting stuck behind farm equipment while driving down the road,” he said, calling it an “invisible wall” for American farmers.
Moreover, Ristow said there’s not much incentive for producers to take a chance on growing more crops or making drastic changes in their methods. With volatile market prices, hidden costs, and other pitfalls, many simply can’t afford to take the risk, he said.
Cost-Price Squeeze
When it comes to federal subsidies for struggling farmers, Ristow said there are roadblocks there, too.
“There’s money out there, but more financial support for farmers is needed as they transition into a more sustainable system,” he said.
Anderson agreed that farmers are in a tough spot.
“I think all of our crop farmers are struggling financially, commodity prices are low. While production costs have increased, the prices for the crops we sell have not increased. That has created a cost-price squeeze,” he said.
In a May commodity markets outlook report, the World Bank forecast that agricultural prices would slowly decline in 2025 and drop by 3 percent in 2026. Much of this is due to improved global supply conditions.
“The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) works to improve domestic and international opportunities for U.S. growers and producers. AMS works with a variety of organizations to support rural America and the nation’s agricultural sector,” a USDA spokesperson told The Epoch Times.
Claims that large-scale producers of corn, soy, wheat, cotton, and rice receive the lion’s share of available federal money have been ongoing for years.
Federal farm subsidies have been under a magnifying glass since 2023, when the Environmental Working Group released an analysis revealing that from 1995 to 2021, the top 10 percent of farm subsidy recipients receiving the largest payments collected more than 78 percent of total commodity program funding. The top 1 percent received 27 percent of subsidy payments.
With a growing list of financial burdens, many family-owned farms are passing into new hands as the older generation retires, Ristow said.
“A lot of the time, the children or other family just aren’t interested in farming,” he said, adding that farmland is being lost at a “high rate.”
Much of this retired farmland is passing to urban developers, which complicates any future possibility of using the land for crops.
“Even if the businesses go out of business, you don’t have the same topsoil anymore. All the life is removed,” Ristow said.
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.