3 ms·

> if you can't compete with agricultural produce done with higher labour cost and with freight on top there's something very wrong with your means of production

> if you can't compete with agricultural produce done with higher labour cost and with freight on top there's something very wrong with your means of production. Isn't the point that EU agricultural surpluses are being dumped in undeveloped economies below cost? You can't compete on price against free (to exaggerate a bit). As I understand it, the EU subsidizes agriculture in order to ensure an overabundant food supply (and because of the political agricultural lobby). This may be a completely fine policy, because you don't want there to be famine if something goes slightly wrong. These subsidies lead to overproduction. Some of the surplus is dumped in foreign markets at prices that are well below cost. Farmers in undeveloped countries cannot compete on price. Since undeveloped countries depend more heavily on agriculture, this has an outsize impact on their economies.

raverbashing 6y ago
> Some of the surplus is dumped in foreign markets at prices that are well below cost. Farmers in undeveloped countries cannot compete on price. Yes, but you would still have the transportation costs on top of them. Which depending on the product is not so cheap. It seems the policies and subsidies change with time as well and some of the overproduction was used by the EU in humanitarian programs as well. It definitely seems to be a politicized topic and I definitely don't think it is without problems. But saying it costs "16GBP per week per each family in increased food costs" is a misrepresentation at the most charitable interpretation. Feel free to compare supermarket prices of unprocessed products (with comparable quality)