(Link to AcmlmWiki) Offline: thank ||bass
Register | Login
Views: 13,040,846
Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album
05-15-24 03:10 AM
0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate.
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Agricultural subsidies: Doha's dead, promises are broken, back to reality New poll | |
Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
User Post
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 6296 days
Last view: 6296 days
Posted on 07-25-06 11:13 PM Link | Quote
I dunno if anyone remembers October last year when:


The US will on Monday offer to end farm export subsidies in five years and slash its domestic subsidies by more than half, in an attempt to revive the flagging Doha round of trade talks.


Natch, hearts were a-flutter. Agricultural protectionism on the part of the US and EU is one of the worst features of the way global trade is set up. It's unfair and pretty directly killing people in the third world.

Some numbers


But [subsidies have] grown into an institutionalised nightmare preventing developing countries from fulfilling their potential in one of the few areas where they enjoy a natural advantage - agriculture. Europe and the US are the main culprits. It is economic and social madness for Europe to be growing, for instance, subsidised sugar beet when its average cost of production is more than double that of efficient exporters such as Brazil and Zambia. It is only possible thanks to ludicrous subsidies, including protective tariffs of up to 140%. As Kevin Watkins of Oxfam says: "The $1.6bn a year the EU gives to the sugar barons of East Anglia and the Paris Basin generates surpluses that deprive countries such as Thailand and Malawi of markets. Mozambique loses almost as much as a result of EU sugar policy as it gets in European aid."

The US is no better. America's 25,000 cotton farmers received more than $3bn in subsidies last year, equivalent to 100% of the market value of cotton output. This works out at a staggering subsidy of $230 an acre. West Africa, one of the mostdeprived places on earth, happens to be one of the most efficient cotton producers, with an estimated 11 million people dependent on cotton as their main source of income. But it can't compete with subsidised products from the US, which has 40% of world exports. If subsidies were removed, West Africa, according to IMF figures, could produce profitably at two thirds of US production costs.


Another example: Thanks to obscene subsidisation, American rice on the streets of Nigeria is actually cheaper than Nigerian produced rice. The result is that developing countries can't compete in these vital crops. They get pushed into other areas, cash-crops, producing solely for export. The result is dependence on the global market place as a supplier of cash-crops to the first world, loss of the ability to feed your own country cheaply, massive social effects as farmers get forced off the land by economic pressure (or sometimes, direct government clearing of small farmers to make way for big agrobusiness) and so forth. If you've ever seen pictures of a famine in a third world agricultural nation, THIS is one of the big reasons why.

So it was a very good think that the US was offering these cuts. Long overdue and it might've even guilted the EU into some action on its CAP. Fast-forward to now though, and we see that once again, the administration's tactics of "announce something cool then underfund, recant the promise, or gut the policy in the house later on" have come into play.

Doha collapses


EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has blamed the US for the collapse of the latest round of global trade talks.
US conditions attached to cutting farming subsidies were "unacceptable" for developing countries, he said.

But the US said it was "fully committed" to the talks and blamed Europe for its lack of ambition over reaching a deal to cut farming tariffs.

[...]

EU Commissioner Mandelson said he was "profoundly disappointed" that talks had stumbled, mainly as a result of America's inflexibility.

"What they're saying is that for every dollar that they strip out of their trade-distorting farm subsidies they want to be given a dollar's worth of market access in developing country markets," he said.


Ignoring the staggering hypocrisy of the EU statement here given that they're not even bothering to put their CAP on the table... the US here needs either a basic lesson in economics or to stop treating the rest of us like idiots. "Market access" won't be blocked, it's the invisible hand who'll drag the US out of the markets in which it is artificially competing... they only have "market access" now because of those damn subsidies. If they lose access it's the market's doing, which is the whole point of the exercise in the first place and the BASIC PRINCIPLE OF THE FREE TRADE THAT THE US TRUMPETS SO LOUDLY. What they're essentially asking for is a different form of assistance to their farmers to preserve their artificial market position in a new way.

Which would have a net impact of ZERO on the developing farmers who're presently getting screwed.

How about this: The US never gets to proclaim itself capitalist or pro-free trade until it stops this rot.


(edited by Arwon on 07-25-06 10:14 PM)
Rom Manic









Since: 12-18-05
From: Detroit, WHAT?!

Last post: 6295 days
Last view: 6295 days
Posted on 07-25-06 11:32 PM Link | Quote
I haven't really been following this whole ordeal closely, but from what I can gather from your post, it's all in the name of making a pretty penny. And it is the US's fault, those people seem just to me in saying so.

If countries really want their crops to make them profit, the tarrifs really should be increased.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 6296 days
Last view: 6296 days
Posted on 07-26-06 12:05 AM Link | Quote
the problem with that, though, is that the double standard between big rich countries and poor third world countries is such that countries which tried that would get squished by WTO rulings.

Also, if you stick tarriffs on imports to let your own stuff compete, as a third world country, you're making everything more expensive for your people, and that's not a good thing.
Rom Manic









Since: 12-18-05
From: Detroit, WHAT?!

Last post: 6295 days
Last view: 6295 days
Posted on 07-26-06 08:49 PM Link | Quote
I think I get it now. So the US can exploit these third world countries by hiring labour for beans, get away with it, and save a shitload of money, but these same third world countries can't repay the favor by increasing the trade tarrifs on certain products coming into the country from the US?

Probably different topic, but anyway...I still think it's retarded how the WTO doesn't put new laws into effect regarding that.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 6296 days
Last view: 6296 days
Posted on 07-27-06 02:31 AM Link | Quote
There's also the fact that it's shooting oneself in the foot in multiple ways. In a developed country like the USA or Australia or the EU, there's no reason for preserving any sector of the economy artificially... it damages you in the long term. You end up paying all this extra tax to keep farmers afloat out of some misguided sense of economic patriotism or simply to pander to special interest groups (happens here with protectionism as well, but only in a few areas and not to anywhere near the same extent as the EU and US), and you end up paying more for food in the end as well.

Meanwhile, you could be reaping the benefits of cheap food from overseas while spending taxpayer money elsewhere, and letting the agricultural sector move to areas it is efficient in (not sure what these are but there'd be some of them).

Of course, try explaining this to a bunch of idiot congressmen in the pockets of big agricultural businesses (or to a bunch of French bureaucrats or National Party politicians in marginal electorates, for that matter).
Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Agricultural subsidies: Doha's dead, promises are broken, back to reality |


ABII

Acmlmboard 1.92.999, 9/17/2006
©2000-2006 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper

Page rendered in 0.009 seconds; used 375.74 kB (max 453.25 kB)