3 ms·
There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss
by sonnyblarney 8y ago
There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things.
They're all externalized in the calculations and first-order thinking, which is why the farmers are essentially under thread.
I live in a supply-managed area (Quebec) and Milk is a lot more expensive. Maybe a little too expensive.
That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products.
I suggest most people would feel the same way!
Ergo, paradoxically, the 'market is inefficient' here! If consumers were able to make reliable choices with respect to the locality of their milk and produce, I would bet they'd make rational choices according to their own motivations to 'pay a little more'.
It's just the way information is transmitted ... it's too onerous on consumers to have to make complex decisions with respect to every purchase!
'Free Trade' proponents actually try to stop things such as labelling like 'made in Michigan' or 'made in Quebec' because this runs counter to their economic arguments (and interests!) ... but hey, if consumers value something for whatever reason, more than others, that's their choice!
I'll bet that a coherent, well communicated effort to label foods in a manner that enables consumers to make quick and easy decisions on this stuff may actually work.
Environmental issues related to 'mass farming' aside - I wish governments or organized bodies would do this.
Hint: we already do this in terms of categories. People chose to eat vegan/vegetarian for whatever reasons based on their own criteria, but it's fairly easy for them to do that: just don't buy the meat. So imagine if they could make such informed decisions as well with their Milk.
Even without this, if I had to chose between 'supply management' and 'cheaper prices' I think I would chose the supply management system, at least for foods.
I'm not sure the Canadian version is perfectly well suited, but the reality of globalism just has too many indirect consequences not on the balance sheet.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago(Same respondent, different account.) > There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, I don't understand what strategic considerations there could be related to family farms. Farms in general, perhaps. > and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things. I acknowledge those concerns exist. I think little of them. > That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products. I'm glad that you feel that way, since you do not have a choice. It would be sad if you did mind, because you would not have the option to make a different choice. I feel the opposite to you. I buy the inexpensive eggs and the inexpensive milk, since there is no discernible difference in taste, and the cheaper stuff costs less than half as much at my grocery store. I don't like to pay twice as much for a product that is no higher in quality.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago'Food security' is a national strategic concern. The US stockpiles oil for certain reasons, most nations also have concern about their ability to weather a war, famine, or some kind of international shock. As one example.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago> 'Food security' is a national strategic concern. As I mentioned in the post you replied to, that has nothing to do with family farms. It has to do with farms in general.
- sonnyblarney 8y agoSubsidies are not for small farms, they are for all dairy farms, and the impetus to provide subsidies to farms is generally rooted at least in part due to 'food security' concerns.