When your trade policy creates a problem big enough to require a $12 billion bailout, you might be doing something wrong. That's the uncomfortable subtext of President Trump's financial aid package for American farmers, which is drawing criticism from economists, analysts, and surprisingly, some of the farmers it's designed to help.

The Trade War's Casualties

American farmers, ironically a cornerstone of Trump's political base, have spent the past year on the losing end of his trade wars. The damage has been particularly brutal for soybean producers, who watched their export demand vanish as China—one of their biggest customers—retaliated by shopping elsewhere.

There's been a glimmer of hope recently. After an October trade truce, China resumed buying U.S. soybeans, making its largest single-day purchase in over two years at roughly 1 million tons just two weeks ago. But don't expect a quick return to the good old days. Any recovery is expected to be gradual, and the farm sector continues to struggle under the weight of geopolitical tensions, shifting trade policies, and unpredictable weather patterns.

Here's how key agricultural commodities are performing:

An Uncomfortable Admission?

Economist Justin Wolfers isn't buying the bailout as a solution. He sees it as the administration tacitly admitting that their trade and tariff policies throughout the year "have hurt Americans."

Wolfers raises a pointed question: if farmers deserve bailouts for costs incurred due to Trump's tariffs, "Why not bail out consumers who are paying more for imported goods?" It's a challenge that highlights his longstanding argument that tariffs essentially function as a tax on American consumers.

Farmers Push Back on the Fix

Perhaps the most damning criticism comes from the very people the bailout is meant to help. The Democratic Party shared a video on X featuring an American soybean farmer who told FactPost News: "we don't want a bailout, we want a market."

The farmer didn't mince words. He argued the funds should go toward caring for senior citizens and the Affordable Care Act instead, calling the bailout nothing more than a band-aid. "What Trump is doing is destroying our markets, and when those markets disappear, we're not gonna get them back," he warned.

Even Republican Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) piled on, framing the bailouts as an admission that tariffs aren't beneficial for farmers. "Who knew?" he added—a sarcastic nod to his repeated warnings that tariffs would damage the American farm economy.

The core issue here is simple: you can give farmers money today, but you can't easily rebuild international relationships and market access that took decades to establish. When your biggest customer finds alternative suppliers, getting them back isn't just about price—it's about reliability and trust. And those commodities aren't included in any bailout package.