And whose fault is that? Who wrote this law requiring the government to buy this milk? Why, the government did.
Because the government will be offering twice the market value for as much milk as you can supply. Imagine you were working for $15 an hour, and someone came up to you and said that if you’d do the same job for them, they’d pay you $30 an hour, and give you as much overtime as you wanted. Would you really stay with your old job instead of getting paid twice as much for the same day’s work? And even if you would, can you say the same for every one of your co-workers?
I see, you’re right–Gov’t would be legally obligated to buy all the milk.
Anyway it’s not going to happen. The night before the final deadline everyone will amazingly turn out to finally have an agreement just in the nick of time…
We must not allow the existence of a dangerous Sweetener Gap to open up between ourselves and other nations! We must preserve the purity of our precious, sweet, sticky, calorie-laden fluids!
What would actually happen if all farm subsidies ended? Prices go up? Prices go up and then settle in to actual market values? What would those values be? Big farms close? Small farms close? Do we even have any small farms receiving subsidies? Because I wouldn’t mind a situation where only small local farms existed, but I’m sure there’s a downside I’m not seeing there.
Er, don’t try to generalize from Canadian dairy prices. Canada pays some of the highest dairy prices in the world because we have a quota system that restricts supply and hence drives up prices significantly (oh, and makes huge profits for agribusinesses).
What makes a farm local? Can I, in CA, not buy apples from a farmer in Washington state? If I can only by produce from “local” farmers, I might be OK because of where I live. Pity the folks in colder climes who have to give up fresh fruits and vegetables for most of the year.
Note that most of us get much of our fresh stuff from south of the border in the winter. Mexico and South America.
I guess that depends on whether or not the apple farm in Washington can keep growing/selling apples without a government subsidy. My comment about local farms was based on the assumption that that would be the result of halting subsidies, but I don’t actually know if that’s a reasonable assumption. Thus the many question marks in my post
OK. I think the whole “local” thing is a bit much. It’s great if you can get truly local, fresh produce, but when looking at tradeoffs, remember that most people can’t get local, fresh, produce much of the year. I doubt if halting subsidies would encourage more small farms focused on selling the stuff locally. If anything, it would probably encourage more importation of food and produce from other countries.
I honestly don’t know what would happen. Frankly, I don’t really care either. If we end subsidies for these things prices will obviously go up. Perhaps dairy is really not a very marketable product and it will only be available in special markets at exorbitant prices. But they will become wildly unpopular with the unwashed masses, which is just fine with me!
I think you’re overestimating the intelligence of the typical Republican. They’ll blame the higher price on the Guv’mint and won’t listen to any cocky liberal trying to explain otherwise.
Only if you think the cost of providing the subsidy doesn’t count. If you’re paying $3 up front and $1 in subsidies via the taxman, you’re still paying $4 even though it only says $3 on the receipt.
The whole lactose tolerance things is obviously a liberal conspiracy. True conservatives are lactose intolerant, which is the base condition for humans.
Ok, or people would eat frozen or canned produce during the winter, which would be fine from a health standpoint, our bodies don’t need fresh strawberries in December. It would take a pretty dramatic shift for people in those areas without access to local fresh produce to accept that they’re not going to get it though, and that might be the real effect. If milk truly should be priced at $7/gallon, is that just the factory farmed dairy stuff or would the dairy down the road need to charge the same?
I guess that’s really my question, if the government is currently subsidizing large food producers, how would ending that practice effect small local farmers? Would there be more farmer’s markets or fewer of them? Would prices at those farmer’s markets go up in line with larger producers or would they be able to undercut those prices?
I live in the opposite of a food desert, in that there are three markets within a five minute walk of my home. This is great, except that all of them sell only seasonal produce and that’s been an adjustment for me since I’ve just moved here from a large city with mega markets (none of which were within walking distance) where I could buy pretty much any produce I wanted.
So I’m wondering if cutting subsidies would result in more communities like mine, or in fist fights over the last gallon in the dairy aisles at Safeway?
Potentially it would expose the fact that the TP is an ideology un-moored from practical reality and this move would open up a discussion about what is and is not the pragmatic thing to do with our government. An examination of the facts and consequences would reveal that blind adherence to any ideology usually winds up being a bad idea.
But we can’t have that conversation in America. Mostly (at the mass media level) we can only talk about what affects rich people and corporations. If it were otherwise I don’t think the TP would have got much attention in the first place.
