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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (356541)	10/30/2007 8:00:08 PM
From: TopCat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578138

"So what would you rather have.....a water subsidy for farmers or higher prices for produce?" Higher prices for produce if that's what the market equilibrium ends up being.

To: tejek who wrote (356541)	10/30/2007 8:36:01 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578138

Top cat already answered for me. Higher prices for produce if thats the market result. I would add that the prices might not be as much higher as you think. Fruits and vegetables can be grown in other places, they are only grown on a vast scale in the San Joaquin Valley because of the subsidized water. Don't subsidize the water and maybe some are still grown there but with the water used much more efficiently, and other vegetables are grown in places where water isn't so expensive. (Water in the San Joaquin Valley is expensive, its just that the users of the water don't pay more than a fraction of its price)