4 ms·
>You'd see a massive reduction in sugar prices and a lot of U.S. farms go under. An honest question, why is this a big issue? If US farms are not competitive p
by cycrutchfield 6y ago
>You'd see a massive reduction in sugar prices and a lot of U.S. farms go under.
An honest question, why is this a big issue? If US farms are not competitive producing sugar, why are we incentivizing them to do so?
- kemitche 6y agoI don't know if this is the actual reason, but I can see value in a country protecting it's food supply to ensure that long-term, they stay self sufficient. Subsidies that keep production local would be a means to that end.
- cycrutchfield 6y agoWe don’t care about being self-sufficient in avocado production, so why do we care about corn so much? I feel like the self-sufficiency is a post-hoc rationalization and the real reason has more to do with politics and lobbying.
- tikhonj 6y agoA couple of ideas: 1. There are strategic reasons for a country to maintain a strong agricultural sector in case of international instability, war... etc. In today's economy we can't be 100% independent, but we still need some level of independence we wouldn't get without government intervention. 2. Other countries are undercutting our prices for reasons we find unethical: extremely low wages, inhuman working conditions, literal slavery... etc. We can't control other countries directly on these fronts, but we can at least ensure that we do not contribute to those practices ourselves. 3. Other countries are driving prices down through government subsidies in a bid to gain control of the market, and our tariffs compensate for that. I have no clue whether these reasons apply to sugar specifically, or whether the US policy on these questions is proportional and effective. But at least it illustrates that there are reasons why a policy like that makes sense for the country as a whole (and not just for sugar producers).