2 ms·
Whoa there chief. The whole 'that would be a good thing' is an overreach. There are 'better' ways to spend that subsidy but having a steady surplus of food subs
by aseerdbnarng 5y ago
Whoa there chief. The whole 'that would be a good thing' is an overreach. There are 'better' ways to spend that subsidy but having a steady surplus of food subsidy or not is a way better position for a country to be in than implementing some JIT mechanism with supply/demand set purely by market prices. Just because agriculture makes up a small % of GDP compared to tech we can more easily get rid of Google than we can get rid of grain.
- colordrops 5y agoYou are arguing with a straw man. They said nothing of getting rid of food surplus or grain. They said to reallocate corn subsidies elsewhere. Presumably one destination could be other foods with greater nutritional value.
- aseerdbnarng 5y agofair point. I was focusing on the 'removing subsidies' part and not the 'reallocate' part. Accept the correction