Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BWAC who wrote (176494)	1/13/2004 1:29:40 PM
From: Charles Tutt	Respond to of 186894

It's not like those subsidies don't come from somewhere. It ought to be possible to lower aggregate taxes by the amount of the subsidies if they are eliminated, which should more than offset increased food prices. Of course, given the current government, the decreased taxes would probably accrue mostly to the already rich (who are also, by and large, the ones getting the subsidies). Subsidies promote LESS efficiency in production, not more. A similar point can be made about health service in this country. Most people who need health care are getting it, so the aggregate cost _is_ being absorbed. In fact, some of it is being provided at exorbitant (e.g. emergency room) costs that should instead (in a rational system) be provided at commodity prices. That's why restructuring the system should NOT be immensely expensive, unless somebody is going to be skimming an immense amount of money off the top where they don't already do so. In fact, restructuring it should be LESS expensive, in toto, if some of the "middle men" can be removed. JMHO. Charles Tutt (SM)

To: BWAC who wrote (176494)	1/13/2004 1:33:48 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

re: But yes, Goods and services will get supplied without subsidies. At some price. From some country. Possibly at the detriment of those who can least afford it. Many countries subsidize their farmers, and to remain competitive, it's probably a good idea that we do it also. It's one thing to be dependent on other countries for oil, it's another to be dependent for food. John

To: BWAC who wrote (176494)	1/13/2004 4:23:06 PM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

More OT, the largest farm subsidy by far has nothing to do with people eating anything. It is the ethanol subsidy, a total waste of our country's money to benefit a chosen few and insure votes in the Iowa caucuses.