4 ms·

Yes, they just explained way. The goal isnt fairness, its preventing famine.

• 9rx 1y ago
  The goal isn't fairness, but it is fair[1]. There is nothing in the crop subsidies that would compel you to grow, say, corn over a vegetable. Corn does receive the lion's share of the subsidies, but that's because we grow way more corn, because that's what the consumer chooses to buy (either directly or indirectly [e.g. meat]).
  • HDThoreaun 1y ago
    Right, and part of why we grow way more corn is the subsidies(vast majority of corn is going to animals, they eat whatever is cheapest). The subsidies lead to too much corn growth which means they are poorly applied, even if they are fair.
    • 9rx 1y ago
      > part of why we grow way more corn is the subsidies That would imply that subsidies give reason to produce corn over a vegetable, which isn't the case. The subsidies are "fair" — even when that isn't the goal. You are right that corn is cheap, but that's a result of technology and the nature of what it is. It requires almost no human effort to produce. Stuff like vegetables, on the other hand, remain incredibly labor intensive even on the most technically advanced farms. It is a much harder problem to solve. As compared to virtually every other food, grain is significantly simpler to handle in almost every way from seeding right to storage and distribution. And corn benefits from being insanely high yielding compared to other grains.