Full Version: Foreign Grain Sales
http://www.hoosieragtoday.com/wire/news/00...pply_171358.php
Folks, as you probably know by now, I'm all in favor of America reducing its trade deficit by cutting down its purchases of Chinese toys and reducing its consumption of Mideast oil.
But, there is a disturbing trend. Rather than build factories in America and sell American manufactured goods abroad, Corporations instead are selling out America's food supply to foreign countries as a way of reducing our trade deficit. And what does that mean for Americans? It means that Americans have to pay much more for their groceries. Higher food prices would not be so bad if those extra dollars were going towards increasing the wages for the laborers out in the field. But its not. Instead, those extra profits are going towards the pockets of a few large Agribusinesses. And thousands of poor Americans will be looking for their food out of a public garbage can if this trend continues, because the food pantries have very limited resources to feed poor people with.
So, the question for debate,
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
Bonus things to consider,
Besides the distorted trade agreements that favor American Agribusinesses over American factories, I can think of other things that are disturbingly wrong with America's agricultural policies. For example, why in the past 50 years has America built millions of Suburban houses over its best farmland? And why do we ship food thousands of miles from California and Florida to other states instead of growing fruits and vegetables locally? And don't even get me started on the insanity of "biodiesel fuel" which is a net energy loser when you consider the energy to grow the stuff vs. what you get out of it.
What other things can the Government do to help out poor Americans who are being squeezed by higher grocery bills?
Folks, as you probably know by now, I'm all in favor of America reducing its trade deficit by cutting down its purchases of Chinese toys and reducing its consumption of Mideast oil.
But, there is a disturbing trend. Rather than build factories in America and sell American manufactured goods abroad, Corporations instead are selling out America's food supply to foreign countries as a way of reducing our trade deficit. And what does that mean for Americans? It means that Americans have to pay much more for their groceries. Higher food prices would not be so bad if those extra dollars were going towards increasing the wages for the laborers out in the field. But its not. Instead, those extra profits are going towards the pockets of a few large Agribusinesses. And thousands of poor Americans will be looking for their food out of a public garbage can if this trend continues, because the food pantries have very limited resources to feed poor people with.
So, the question for debate,
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
Bonus things to consider,
Besides the distorted trade agreements that favor American Agribusinesses over American factories, I can think of other things that are disturbingly wrong with America's agricultural policies. For example, why in the past 50 years has America built millions of Suburban houses over its best farmland? And why do we ship food thousands of miles from California and Florida to other states instead of growing fruits and vegetables locally? And don't even get me started on the insanity of "biodiesel fuel" which is a net energy loser when you consider the energy to grow the stuff vs. what you get out of it.
What other things can the Government do to help out poor Americans who are being squeezed by higher grocery bills?
QUOTE
So, the question for debate,
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
You link does not work but regardless the answer is NO.
How can we complain about “trade deficit” and then worry about grain sales. This is the idea isn’t it? We are good at growing grain – partially because our government subsidizes the farmers – billions per year – THAT is a problem. The government targets the price.
“Taxpayers funding Washington's $20,000-per-household budget have long known they are not getting their money's worth. Farm subsidies are among the most wasteful uses of taxpayer dollars. The budget-busting $180 billion farm bill enacted before the 2002 elections not only encourages the crop overproduction that depresses crop prices and farm incomes, but also undermines trade and encourages other nations to refuse American exports.
Perhaps worst of all, farm subsidies are not distributed to the small, struggling family farmers whom lawmakers typically mention when defending these policies. Rather, most farm subsidies are distributed to large farms, agribusinesses, politicians, and celebrity "hobby farmers." This paper analyzes how Washington distributed farm subsidies in 2002 and illustrates that farm subsidies continue to represent America's largest corporate welfare program.”
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1763.cfm
And what is worse is the support for alcohol production from corn which raises all food prices and has minimal impact on out use of foreign oil.
What is with the protectionism going around... I'd better get immunized...
Anyone who talks about the cost of food in America better check their facts. Americans spend less than 10 percent of their disposable income on food. source
Food is awefully cheap in the United States of America.
I will echo the sentiment that food growers in the US do not need subsidies. The subsidies simply distort the market price for food (one reason why it is so low, it really should be higher).
Compare us to the rest of the world (and keep in mind we have higher incomes)
Move to Indonesia and spend half your money on food and then come complaining...
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
No no no no no. A thousand times no. We are good at making grain, let's keep making it.
What other things can the Government do to help out poor Americans who are being squeezed by higher grocery bills?
There are already food banks, food stamps, Meals on Wheels programs and many many other ways for people to avoid being hungry.
Just today, the local group of farmers donated one million eggs to local food banks. One milleeeeeon eggs. It is part of a nationwide effort. [email="http://www.csrwire.com/News/11310.html"]America's Egg Producers Donate 12 Million Eggs to America's Second Harvest[/email]
Anyone who talks about the cost of food in America better check their facts. Americans spend less than 10 percent of their disposable income on food. source
QUOTE
USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS) has recently released food expenditure statistics for 2005. They show that Americans are spending, on average, 9.9 percent of their disposable income on food.
That's up slightly from 9.7 percent in 2004 but very consistent with figures over the past five years. The percentage dropped to single digits for the first time in recorded U.S. history in 2000.
Twenty years ago, American consumers spent 11.7 percent of their disposable income on food. Thirty years ago, that figure was 15.1 percent. Going back in history, Americans spent about 20 percent of their income on food about the time today's baby boomers were born. In 1933, the figure was more than 25 percent.
That's up slightly from 9.7 percent in 2004 but very consistent with figures over the past five years. The percentage dropped to single digits for the first time in recorded U.S. history in 2000.
Twenty years ago, American consumers spent 11.7 percent of their disposable income on food. Thirty years ago, that figure was 15.1 percent. Going back in history, Americans spent about 20 percent of their income on food about the time today's baby boomers were born. In 1933, the figure was more than 25 percent.
Food is awefully cheap in the United States of America.
I will echo the sentiment that food growers in the US do not need subsidies. The subsidies simply distort the market price for food (one reason why it is so low, it really should be higher).
Compare us to the rest of the world (and keep in mind we have higher incomes)
QUOTE
International statistics provided by ERS only account for the percentage of disposable income spent on food at home. Still, the numbers show huge disparities between the U.S. and other countries.
The U.S. percentage is 6.1 percent. The next lowest figure comes from consumers in the United Kingdom at 8.3 percent. (Note: No statistics are available in the report for Canada, which would be considered a lower percentage country.)
German consumers spend 10.9 percent of their disposable income on food at home, followed by Japan (13.4 percent), South Korea (13.4 percent), and France (13.6 percent) among high income countries.
Middle income countries include South Africa (17.5 percent) and Mexico (21.7 percent). China (28.3 percent) and Russia (36.7 percent) are seeing rapid decreases in food expenditure percentages but are still relatively high. India (39.4 percent) and Indonesia (49.9 percent) are among the highest when it comes to the amount of disposable income spent on food.
The U.S. percentage is 6.1 percent. The next lowest figure comes from consumers in the United Kingdom at 8.3 percent. (Note: No statistics are available in the report for Canada, which would be considered a lower percentage country.)
German consumers spend 10.9 percent of their disposable income on food at home, followed by Japan (13.4 percent), South Korea (13.4 percent), and France (13.6 percent) among high income countries.
Middle income countries include South Africa (17.5 percent) and Mexico (21.7 percent). China (28.3 percent) and Russia (36.7 percent) are seeing rapid decreases in food expenditure percentages but are still relatively high. India (39.4 percent) and Indonesia (49.9 percent) are among the highest when it comes to the amount of disposable income spent on food.
Move to Indonesia and spend half your money on food and then come complaining...
Should the Government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
No no no no no. A thousand times no. We are good at making grain, let's keep making it.
What other things can the Government do to help out poor Americans who are being squeezed by higher grocery bills?
There are already food banks, food stamps, Meals on Wheels programs and many many other ways for people to avoid being hungry.
Just today, the local group of farmers donated one million eggs to local food banks. One milleeeeeon eggs. It is part of a nationwide effort. [email="http://www.csrwire.com/News/11310.html"]America's Egg Producers Donate 12 Million Eggs to America's Second Harvest[/email]
QUOTE(Amlord @ Mar 12 2008, 05:18 PM) 
Anyone who talks about the cost of food in America better check their facts. Americans spend less than 10 percent of their disposable income on food.
Not really if you count subsidies.
Should the government restrict the sale of American grain to foreign countries in an effort to keep grocery prices down?
No. Grocery prices are up because the cost of transporting good is up. We export food because we have a surplus of it and we displace struggling agricultural economies in developing countries because of subsidies. Protectionism has its place in developing industries, and subsidies can be a life saver in times of food shortages, but our agricultural policies have outlived their purpose. A depressing percentage of Americans are obese. We don't need more food.
QUOTE
lesly
No. Grocery prices are up because the cost of transporting good is up.
No. Grocery prices are up because the cost of transporting good is up.
And the price of corn is up – which feeds every animal we eat. You are right – farm subsidies are a wast of money.
Give me the name of a candidate who would cut them 10 cents? Obama? No way – Hillary – no chance.
Only McCain:
“Monday, February 18, 2008
McCain takes on farm subsidies
Anyone want to guess the last time a major party nominee said this?
“At a time when Americans must work four months a year just to pay their taxes, John McCain cannot support farm policies that are too costly for the taxpayer, particularly when they also play a negative role in encouraging farmers to rely on government subsidies,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said of the dairy subsidy." (Wisconsin State Journal via NRO - The Corner)
Try never. On this issue at least, McCain can break new ground for small-c conservatives.”
http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2...n-takes-on.html
Put me in line with Ted and Amlord (ha! Bet you didn't see that coming...)
Food policy in the United States is absurd enough as it is. To paraphrase a magazine article that I read three weeks ago (hence me not providing a link); "how does it make sense to burn 10% of our food supply to decrease our fuel consumption by 1%?"
There are three main factors driving up the price of food in the United States; and the single common element is Government policy.
1) Corn is being directed towards ethanol production through massive government subsidies. This removes corn from the food supply, driving up prices of corn-based products (everything from Chocolate-Frosted Sugar Bombs to Coke.)
2) Massive subsidies for pork and beef production, combined with an increased demand in growing economies for protein-centered diets. Both industries massive support from government, and global demand is skyrocketing as economies move towards more western, protein-rich diets. Pork and Beef production requires massive amounts of grain, primarily wheat and corn. Since the amount of wheat/corn to produce 1 pound of meat is substantial, it removes food from the supply chain while driving up costs.
3) High fuel prices. Now this obviously isn't entirely the result of government action, but one of the single-largest factors in the high price of oil is the low price of the U.S. dollar; and that is a result of deliberate US policy. As others have pointed out, transportation costs is one of the biggest factors in the rising price of food; increasing fuel costs are also driving up the cost of food production, in particular the rise in diesel prices.
The fastest, and easiest ways to make food cheaper are to simply stop burning it and feeding it to animals.
Food policy in the United States is absurd enough as it is. To paraphrase a magazine article that I read three weeks ago (hence me not providing a link); "how does it make sense to burn 10% of our food supply to decrease our fuel consumption by 1%?"
There are three main factors driving up the price of food in the United States; and the single common element is Government policy.
1) Corn is being directed towards ethanol production through massive government subsidies. This removes corn from the food supply, driving up prices of corn-based products (everything from Chocolate-Frosted Sugar Bombs to Coke.)
2) Massive subsidies for pork and beef production, combined with an increased demand in growing economies for protein-centered diets. Both industries massive support from government, and global demand is skyrocketing as economies move towards more western, protein-rich diets. Pork and Beef production requires massive amounts of grain, primarily wheat and corn. Since the amount of wheat/corn to produce 1 pound of meat is substantial, it removes food from the supply chain while driving up costs.
3) High fuel prices. Now this obviously isn't entirely the result of government action, but one of the single-largest factors in the high price of oil is the low price of the U.S. dollar; and that is a result of deliberate US policy. As others have pointed out, transportation costs is one of the biggest factors in the rising price of food; increasing fuel costs are also driving up the cost of food production, in particular the rise in diesel prices.
The fastest, and easiest ways to make food cheaper are to simply stop burning it and feeding it to animals.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.