Not only that, but these subsidies are helping to starve the poor in Africa and other major food producing nations in the developing world. In 2001 world subsidies for agriculture in the rich countries (in particular the EU, the United States and Japan) amounted to some $300bn. This is more than six times the aid that the rich countries allocate in their budgets (for example the EU's aid budget is $25bn). The subsidies prevent poor farmers in Africa selling their produce to the rich markets and overproduction in the rich countries is flooded into the poor countries forcing their farmers under. This is a severe crime against humanity. The paltry few farmers in the Western world are placed above millions of poor people the world over. To put it into perspective, the EU cattle sector alone receives more in support than half the world's population has to live on.
I certainly do not want to pay for farmers. I would not want to pay for them even if the subsidies did not have the effect they do on the developing world. As long as the food I am eating is safe, then I have no qualms if it is from Sub-Saharan Africa or Brazil. Why should I fork out more just to keep European farmers (in particular French ones) happy? The fact that I am helping to starve the world's poor every time I go to the supermarket sickens me greatly.
The answer is simple: the subsidies must be removed. If rich-world farms close then so be it. That will be nothing compared to the $128bn that worldwide liberalisation would bring in immediate gains, and much more in the future.
Source: The Economist: The World in 2003 (2002).