5 ms·

> farmers consume more quinoa than they sell, and suffer when prices go up. Unless there are other foods they can buy which are cheaper. Then they benefit fro

by artsrc 13y ago

> farmers consume more quinoa than they sell, and suffer when prices go up. Unless there are other foods they can buy which are cheaper. Then they benefit from the higher prices and don't pay them.

lukasb 13y ago
The reason staples are staples is because they're cheapest per calorie. There probably are not replacements that are as cheap per calorie. Remember that subsistence farmers tend to be geographically isolated so you can't assume they have access to the same food products you do.
- dbecker 13y ago
  If they are net consumers of the staple, they must be net producers of some other crops. If the price of the staple increases dramatically, can't they shift towards eating other crops (that they were previously net producers of)?
  - lukasb 13y ago
    "If they are net consumers of the staple, they must be net producers of some other crops." Again, those other crops are likely more expensive per calorie. That means there is no mix of consumption that will get them the same amount of calories they previously consumed, which for subsistence farmers will often mean malnutrition if not starvation.
    - Gormo 13y ago
      > those other crops are likely more expensive In terms of effort required to grow those crops, or in terms of market price? If they're growing the crops in order to eat them, the market price isn't relevant (except that if those other crops are expensive on the market, they can sell those for a profit, too).
TylerE 13y ago
Shipping costs, which are significant when dealing with bulk products.
lsc 13y ago
Something you sell is, generally speaking, more vulnerable to confiscation than something you make yourself... I mean, taxes, for example, are generally levied between when you sell a thing and when you buy food. (in my jurisdiction, I don't have to pay sales tax when buying food I intend to eat, but if I sold something to afford that food, I'd have to pay taxes on that income. If I grew food for my own personal use, there would be no taxes involved.) For me? It's not a huge deal because food (and housing and other post-tax expenditures... ) is a very small portion of what my business brings in,(most of my expenditures are things like electricity and payroll, which come out of the business pre-tax) but i imagine it makes a difference for sustenance farmers. I mean, I'm not saying taxation is the only way it's easier for others to get their hands on your crops if the crops are bought and sold... but it's one of the more clear examples.

by artsrc 13y ago

> farmers consume more quinoa than they sell, and suffer when prices go up. Unless there are other foods they can buy which are cheaper. Then they benefit from the higher prices and don't pay them.

lukasb 13y ago

The reason staples are staples is because they're cheapest per calorie. There probably are not replacements that are as cheap per calorie. Remember that subsistence farmers tend to be geographically isolated so you can't assume they have access to the same food products you do.

dbecker 13y ago
If they are net consumers of the staple, they must be net producers of some other crops. If the price of the staple increases dramatically, can't they shift towards eating other crops (that they were previously net producers of)?
- lukasb 13y ago
  "If they are net consumers of the staple, they must be net producers of some other crops." Again, those other crops are likely more expensive per calorie. That means there is no mix of consumption that will get them the same amount of calories they previously consumed, which for subsistence farmers will often mean malnutrition if not starvation.
  - Gormo 13y ago
    > those other crops are likely more expensive In terms of effort required to grow those crops, or in terms of market price? If they're growing the crops in order to eat them, the market price isn't relevant (except that if those other crops are expensive on the market, they can sell those for a profit, too).

TylerE 13y ago

Shipping costs, which are significant when dealing with bulk products.

lsc 13y ago

Something you sell is, generally speaking, more vulnerable to confiscation than something you make yourself... I mean, taxes, for example, are generally levied between when you sell a thing and when you buy food. (in my jurisdiction, I don't have to pay sales tax when buying food I intend to eat, but if I sold something to afford that food, I'd have to pay taxes on that income. If I grew food for my own personal use, there would be no taxes involved.) For me? It's not a huge deal because food (and housing and other post-tax expenditures... ) is a very small portion of what my business brings in,(most of my expenditures are things like electricity and payroll, which come out of the business pre-tax) but i imagine it makes a difference for sustenance farmers. I mean, I'm not saying taxation is the only way it's easier for others to get their hands on your crops if the crops are bought and sold... but it's one of the more clear examples.