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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (99409)	2/8/2005 8:19:50 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793761

Don't the agricultural subsidies violate the WTO agreements? Aren't all members of the WTO required to get rid of them, regardless of the pain and suffering?

To: LindyBill who wrote (99409)	2/8/2005 8:20:00 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 793761

There is many benefits of cold turkey, but when people have planned their lives based on the way the programs are structured, when the economy of various regions is based on the subsidies, it might be good practically to phase in the elimination of them. Even if it works better in a practical sense to just toss them out all at once (which is possible), it probably is politically impossible. Tim

To: LindyBill who wrote (99409)	2/8/2005 8:39:02 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793761

Going "cold turkey" is always better when you are eliminating something bad. I think that, when the something that you're eliminating is job related, that phasing is important. Young people can find other ways to make a living. It's not so easy for middle aged people who have done nothing but, say, farm all their lives. Pulling the rug out from under them is really cold. For a lot of these areas, particularly something like tobacco farming, people have had plenty of warning. I would include warning time in the phasing. We can stop supporting tobacco farming this very day. There shouldn't be any young people still doing that. If there are, they're cognitively impaired. I agree with what you posted about small farmers. If they want to farm, they should have found a niche by now. Shiitake mushrooms, herbs, something like that.

To: LindyBill who wrote (99409)	2/8/2005 9:21:43 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 793761

I'm still seeing a lot of opinions on the Ag program. I'd still like to see some bona fides about Ag experience from anyone. I don't post about how mass transit should be run in LA or DC because I have no experience with it.

To: LindyBill who wrote (99409)	2/8/2005 9:52:31 PM
From: miraje	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793761

Going "cold turkey" is always better when you are eliminating something bad. New Zealand did away with all agriculture subsidies with a quite positive result... Farming without subsidies? Some lessons from New Zealand By Laura Sayre What would the world look like without agricultural subsidies? What would the United States look like? If a crystal ball exists for those questions, its name is New Zealand, one of the first and still one of the few modern countries to have completely dismantled its system of agricultural price supports and other forms of economic protection for farmers. Brace yourself: this is free-market faith to make Adam Smith proud. But the New Zealand experience is pretty persuasive. Well into its second decade of subsidy-free farming, New Zealand enjoys a worldwide reputation for its high-quality, efficient and innovative agricultural systems. New Zealand agriculture is profitable without subsidies, and that means more people staying in the business. Alone among developed countries of the world, New Zealand has virtually the same percentage of its population employed in agriculture today as it did 30 years ago, and the same number of people living in rural areas as it did in 1920. Although the transition to an unsubsidized farm economy wasn’t easy, memories of the adjustment period are fading fast and today there are few critics to be found of the country’s bold move. ____________________________________________________________ The rest of the article at: newfarm.org