08/25/2026
“You chose this lifestyle.”
You're right.
Farmers chose to farm. Ranchers chose to raise cattle. They chose the early mornings, late nights, seven-day weeks, droughts, broken equipment, livestock losses, unpredictable markets and years when there's very little left after the bills are paid.
But here's the question nobody seems to ask:
If they didn't choose it, who would?
Someone has to plant the crops.
Someone has to raise the cattle.
Someone has to bale the hay.
Someone has to tend livestock when it's 105° outside and when it's freezing.
Someone has to show up on Sundays, holidays and Christmas morning because animals don't know what a day off is.
Yes, it's a choice. And for many, it's a lifestyle they wouldn't trade for anything.
But being proud of the life doesn't mean producers aren't allowed to talk about how difficult it has become to sustain it.
When a farmer talks about fuel, fertilizer, insurance, land, feed, equipment, interest or taxes getting more expensive, that's not necessarily whining. Those costs ultimately determine whether another generation can afford to keep producing food.
And that's where this conversation needs to lose the politics.
It shouldn't matter whether the person raising your food voted Republican, Democrat or didn't vote at all. Drought doesn't check a voter registration card. Neither does the feed bill, the fuel bill or the bank.
Hoping a farmer or rancher fails because you disagree with their politics doesn't hurt a political party.
It removes another producer from American agriculture.
And eventually, if enough people decide the sacrifice isn't worth it anymore, America is left with a much bigger question:
If we don't do it… who will?
Because somebody still has to feed the country.
