(A copy of a posting that I made to the ruralgreens discussion list at Yahoo Groups. I was responding to a reference to a posted link to a discussion of the new federal budget and its effect on farmers.)
> FOCUS: Farmers and the Poor Hit Hard by Bush Budget
> http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/020605Y.shtml
I took the liberty to change the subject, because I think that this is going to be one of the very key issues on which this group needs to focus and spend some energy, and get the Green Party US to do the same.
To quote from the referenced article:
> Powerful agricultural interests were among the first to label Bush's proposed budget cuts as unfair and shortsighted. Farmers receive about $15 billion annually in federal farm program payments to help produce major commodities, including corn, cotton, rice and wheat.
>
> California farmers could end up bearing a disproportionate share of the burden if the cuts in crop subsidies were enacted, said economist Daniel Sumner. "Rice and cotton are very important to this state," said Sumner, who is director of the Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.
> FOCUS: Farmers and the Poor Hit Hard by Bush Budget
> http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/020605Y.shtml
I took the liberty to change the subject, because I think that this is going to be one of the very key issues on which this group needs to focus and spend some energy, and get the Green Party US to do the same.
To quote from the referenced article:
> Powerful agricultural interests were among the first to label Bush's proposed budget cuts as unfair and shortsighted. Farmers receive about $15 billion annually in federal farm program payments to help produce major commodities, including corn, cotton, rice and wheat.
>
> California farmers could end up bearing a disproportionate share of the burden if the cuts in crop subsidies were enacted, said economist Daniel Sumner. "Rice and cotton are very important to this state," said Sumner, who is director of the Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.
At this point I believe that there is a conflict of goals. There is substantial evidence, part of which I have made available to this list earlier (search the archives).
The point is that the subsidies of the very crops that Mr. Sumner is arguing to have continued have had a significant negative effect on the economies of a number of countries, especially cotton producers in sub-Saharan Africa. Even as the low cost producers of Cotton, they can not compete in the modern, US baised markets.
So, here is a real ethical question for all. Do we support such subsidies to protect US Farm Interests, or should we argue against such subsidies because they are destroying the economies of other countries?
It is rather like my dear Senator Boxer, who argues so eloquently to keep open all of the current military bases in California, but to close the un-needed bases elsewhere. It all depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Wes
_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss