5 ms·

Canada has a thing called "Supply Management". It means that for some agricultural industries, we limit how many people can produce, for example, milk. This r

by b112 9mo ago

Canada has a thing called "Supply Management". It means that for some agricultural industries, we limit how many people can produce, for example, milk. This restriction keeps the price of milk stable, and high enough that farmers can make a profit. It may seem strange to some, but the goal is to ensure that we don't have to bail out our farmers. The alternative is as in the US, where anyone can produce milk, and the price craters, and farmers need to be constantly bailed out. Canadians watch crazy things like for example the US Federal government buying millions and millions of gallons of milk, making cheese, and storing it for decades. All to reduce supply/create demand, and keep the price artificially high. I suppose one bonus is the US government gives some of this cheese to the poor. The other crazy part is the US federal government has repeatedly bought dairy farms out, to reduce supply. Literally bought entire farms, and closed them down. Canada wants a stable supply of milk. We don't want to rely upon a foreign power for basic food-stuffs. And we don't want to spend untold billions. Thus, supply management. Meanwhile, the US runs around saying we're crazy commies because we have price and supply control, says free market is perfect, then spends endless billions over decades to pretend the market works. Oh and also, the US screams about how our market isn't "open", how we unfairly manipulate the market, then... wants to inject super cheap, underpriced milk, all of the result of US federal tax dollars spending billions. Finally, it is illegal to use growth hormones in Canada on cattle. Not so in the US. With the excess supply issues in dairy in the US, maybe the US should do the same?

newsclues 9mo ago
Canada dumps good milk down the drain while people go hungry and suffer high food prices. The supply management system is not perfect.
- b112 9mo ago
  You can't produce an exact amount of food. It isn't an assembly line, it's farming, it's biological. You need to aim for excess, to ensure enough is produced during drought, animal sickness, and other variability. What Canada does is ensure there is excess, but not crazy amounts. It also ensures the market price is fair to farmers. What you call "high food price" we call "farmers not going bankrupt". And while nothing is perfect, supply management is far better than the alternatives.
  - 9rx 9mo ago
    > supply management is far better than the alternatives. Why, then, only dairy, poultry, eggs, and — at least until 2007 when the government bought back the quota — tobacco production? If the farmers growing the foods that are actually deemed important in a healthy diet end up bankrupt, no big deal? > It also ensures the market price is fair to farmers. Well, it creates a two-tier system where the 'blessed' farmers who are born into it (or born into a European farm that can be sold at a high enough price to buy a farmer in Canada out) have artificially high incomes to spend on land, equipment, etc. at inflated prices. It is hard to think that is fair to all the other farmers who have to compete against the farmers of the world when selling their product but have to pay supply managed farmer prices for inputs. I suppose everything is in the eye of the beholder. I'll grant you that all the other farmers' retirement plan is to sell off their land to a supply managed farmer who will pay way more than it is worth. That keeps the peace. Bit sad to see everything go to those producers who get special treatment, though.
    - foofoo55 9mo ago
      Supply management does have its problems, but given the involvement of imperfect humans nothing will be without problems. Canadian pork, beef, and vegetable farmers that I personally know also complain that they can't enact supply management for their sector. They also envy the appearance of high profits, an easy life, and government subsidies & bailouts (yes, Canadian dairy farmers still receive those) for those in a supply managed sector. At the end of the day, consumers get stable and somewhat realistic prices and supply, while farmers also get stable income.
      - 9rx 9mo ago
        > consumers get stable and somewhat realistic prices [...] while farmers also get stable income. Which? You can't have both. Input costs are subject to the whims of non-supply managed markets. When, say, input costs rise either the farmer has to absorb that cost (unstable income), or the cost has to be passed on to the customer (unstable consumer price). > and supply Oh? https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/article/some-maritime-grocery-stores-facing-lactose-free-milk-shortage/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/article/some-maritime-grocer..., https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/canada/after-the-u-s-is-canada-also-facing-a-shortage-why-is-the-country-importing-eggs-from-ukraine-these-could-be-the-reasons/articleshow/120097235.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/cana..., https://farmersforum.com/cracks-in-supply-management/ https://farmersforum.com/cracks-in-supply-management/
- miffy900 9mo ago
  >Canada dumps good milk down the drain while people go hungry and suffer high food prices I'm not sure if you realise this, but the exact same thing happens in the US.
hervature 9mo ago
> The alternative is as in the US, where anyone can produce milk, and the price craters, and farmers need to be constantly bailed out. Do you have references to bailouts specifically for dairy farms? The big bailouts recently were due to reciprocal tariffs. There is the Milk Loss Program but that is limited to 30 days of production per year. I would also classify this more of an insurance program than bailout.
- b112 9mo ago
  Examples: https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/23/nyregion/us-offers-dairymen-a-buyout.html https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/23/nyregion/us-offers-dairym... https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/1_2_overview_brown.pdf https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/1_2_overview_brow... The PDF has some data showing how much post-market intervention costs. It's particularly infuriating how US politicians will stated "we have a free market". whilst intervention happens, and then get upset that Canada does it differently. Even more bizarre, is Canada has only 1/10th the population of the US. Both countries carve out exclusions, but the US side goes bananas that we don't have completely open markets on the agricultural side. So? We can both exclude each others markets, for agriculture, who cares? With 1/10th of the population, if you manages to get 10% of the Canadian market, that's one hundredth of the whole US market. It's such a tiny amount. Everyone here suspects the US just wants to drive all Canadian agriculture to bankruptcy, making us entirely dependent upon the US. No way. Not going to happen. That's madness. In terms of market intervention, we can't afford to do it the way the US does. We don't have billions to buy up excess milk, or buy out farmers to reduce supply. It's immensely wasteful to the taxpayer. Which is very strange, because it's often parties on the right in the US, which do buyouts.
mlrtime 9mo ago
Ok great, now do maple syrup https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2024/04/minister-macaulay-announces-new-funding-to-help-promote-canadian-maple-syrup-around-the-world.html https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2024/04/... https://ppaq.ca/en/sale-purchase-maple-syrup/worlds-only-reserve-maple-syrup/ https://ppaq.ca/en/sale-purchase-maple-syrup/worlds-only-res...

by b112 9mo ago

newsclues 9mo ago

Canada dumps good milk down the drain while people go hungry and suffer high food prices. The supply management system is not perfect.

b112 9mo ago
You can't produce an exact amount of food. It isn't an assembly line, it's farming, it's biological. You need to aim for excess, to ensure enough is produced during drought, animal sickness, and other variability. What Canada does is ensure there is excess, but not crazy amounts. It also ensures the market price is fair to farmers. What you call "high food price" we call "farmers not going bankrupt". And while nothing is perfect, supply management is far better than the alternatives.
- 9rx 9mo ago
  > supply management is far better than the alternatives. Why, then, only dairy, poultry, eggs, and — at least until 2007 when the government bought back the quota — tobacco production? If the farmers growing the foods that are actually deemed important in a healthy diet end up bankrupt, no big deal? > It also ensures the market price is fair to farmers. Well, it creates a two-tier system where the 'blessed' farmers who are born into it (or born into a European farm that can be sold at a high enough price to buy a farmer in Canada out) have artificially high incomes to spend on land, equipment, etc. at inflated prices. It is hard to think that is fair to all the other farmers who have to compete against the farmers of the world when selling their product but have to pay supply managed farmer prices for inputs. I suppose everything is in the eye of the beholder. I'll grant you that all the other farmers' retirement plan is to sell off their land to a supply managed farmer who will pay way more than it is worth. That keeps the peace. Bit sad to see everything go to those producers who get special treatment, though.
  - foofoo55 9mo ago
    Supply management does have its problems, but given the involvement of imperfect humans nothing will be without problems. Canadian pork, beef, and vegetable farmers that I personally know also complain that they can't enact supply management for their sector. They also envy the appearance of high profits, an easy life, and government subsidies & bailouts (yes, Canadian dairy farmers still receive those) for those in a supply managed sector. At the end of the day, consumers get stable and somewhat realistic prices and supply, while farmers also get stable income.
    - 9rx 9mo ago
      > consumers get stable and somewhat realistic prices [...] while farmers also get stable income. Which? You can't have both. Input costs are subject to the whims of non-supply managed markets. When, say, input costs rise either the farmer has to absorb that cost (unstable income), or the cost has to be passed on to the customer (unstable consumer price). > and supply Oh? https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/article/some-maritime-grocery-stores-facing-lactose-free-milk-shortage/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/article/some-maritime-grocer..., https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/canada/after-the-u-s-is-canada-also-facing-a-shortage-why-is-the-country-importing-eggs-from-ukraine-these-could-be-the-reasons/articleshow/120097235.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/cana..., https://farmersforum.com/cracks-in-supply-management/ https://farmersforum.com/cracks-in-supply-management/
miffy900 9mo ago
>Canada dumps good milk down the drain while people go hungry and suffer high food prices I'm not sure if you realise this, but the exact same thing happens in the US.

hervature 9mo ago

> The alternative is as in the US, where anyone can produce milk, and the price craters, and farmers need to be constantly bailed out. Do you have references to bailouts specifically for dairy farms? The big bailouts recently were due to reciprocal tariffs. There is the Milk Loss Program but that is limited to 30 days of production per year. I would also classify this more of an insurance program than bailout.

b112 9mo ago
Examples: https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/23/nyregion/us-offers-dairymen-a-buyout.html https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/23/nyregion/us-offers-dairym... https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/1_2_overview_brown.pdf https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/1_2_overview_brow... The PDF has some data showing how much post-market intervention costs. It's particularly infuriating how US politicians will stated "we have a free market". whilst intervention happens, and then get upset that Canada does it differently. Even more bizarre, is Canada has only 1/10th the population of the US. Both countries carve out exclusions, but the US side goes bananas that we don't have completely open markets on the agricultural side. So? We can both exclude each others markets, for agriculture, who cares? With 1/10th of the population, if you manages to get 10% of the Canadian market, that's one hundredth of the whole US market. It's such a tiny amount. Everyone here suspects the US just wants to drive all Canadian agriculture to bankruptcy, making us entirely dependent upon the US. No way. Not going to happen. That's madness. In terms of market intervention, we can't afford to do it the way the US does. We don't have billions to buy up excess milk, or buy out farmers to reduce supply. It's immensely wasteful to the taxpayer. Which is very strange, because it's often parties on the right in the US, which do buyouts.

mlrtime 9mo ago

Ok great, now do maple syrup https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2024/04/minister-macaulay-announces-new-funding-to-help-promote-canadian-maple-syrup-around-the-world.html https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2024/04/... https://ppaq.ca/en/sale-purchase-maple-syrup/worlds-only-reserve-maple-syrup/ https://ppaq.ca/en/sale-purchase-maple-syrup/worlds-only-res...