10-03-2003 00:18									#61
	Full PM-box? Change here!

No farm subsidies. Period. Why should I pay twice as much just to protect the job of some hick in Kansas who votes republican anways. Lets face it, we suck at farming. By letting our farmers go out of buisness, we pay less, and we help third world countries pay off their debt. Kill two birds with one stone.

	10-03-2003 00:21									#62
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia No farm subsidies. Period. Why should I pay twice as much just to protect the job of some hick in Kansas who votes republican anways. Lets face it, we suck at farming. By letting our farmers go out of buisness, we pay less, and we help third world countries pay off their debt. Kill two birds with one stone.

You're not saying the US sucks at farming are you?

	10-03-2003 00:24									#63
	Full PM-box? Change here!

yes i am.

	10-03-2003 00:41									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I wouldn't go that far; in free, fair, and open competetion we'd run half of the farmers in Europe out of business. It's just a matter of economies of scale. We have big farms and they have small farms so guess who gets pinched worse when commidity prices fall? That's why U.S. farms get buy with subsides of less then half what the EU is paying.

	10-03-2003 00:50									#65
	Put an end to popups!

i am not comparing farmers within the developed world. i am comparing farmers within the entire world. maybe we would run half the farmers out of buisness in europe but so what? the third world would run the vaste majority of all developped countries farmers out of buiness.

	10-03-2003 00:52									#66
	Suffering from ads?

US farms got by with few subsidies not 2 years ago. There are two ways of looking at the addition of fairly huge subsidies (not mutually exclusive). (1) The US now sees the political need to subsidize their farmers; or (2) the US is to use its subsidies as a bargaining chip in getting Europe to reduce or eliminate its subsidies.

Bush probably went for a little of both on a temporary basis, just like he did on steel. Personally I find both distasteful, except on a very temporary basis.

	10-03-2003 00:54									#67
	Remove this text

and why is there a political ned to subsidize them? because they arnt making enough money by competiting on the open market.

	10-03-2003 00:55									#68
	Got spare money?

Because the Senate has powerful members from farm states, including the Senate Majority Leader at the time. Sometimes you have to compromise to get what you want.

As I remember, a senator was successful in putting it on the Senate agenda and threatened to talk about farm subsidies exclusively until the rest of the Senate gave in. Daschel used this to ratfvck what Bush wanted to talk about. Both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate are hopelessly divided on the issue. This went on for about 4 weeks last year, IIRC.

Last edited by DanS on 10-03-2003 at 01:00

	10-03-2003 00:55									#69
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia the third world would run the vaste majority of all developped countries farmers out of buiness.

nope. not even close

	10-03-2003 00:59									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The problem is that our farming techniques have become too efficient not that they aren't efficient.

	10-03-2003 01:00									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

if they are so efficient, then why do we subsidize them?

	10-03-2003 01:07									#72
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia if they are so efficient, then why do we subsidize them?

because increased productivity caused prices to fall dramatically. It's not easy for the older farmers to just sell the farm and start a new career. The subsidies take away the hard effects of capitalism.

	10-03-2003 02:42									#73
	Tired of ads?

i disagree. increased productivity is not why the prices are falling. its increased number of suppliers. all of the third world countries are jumping on the export promotion bandwagon (largely due to IMF and world bankpolicies) and now concentrate on producing food. now increased amount of food means falling prices. on top of that, food is price inelastic, which means that as the price falls, people will not buy dramatically more.
this situation has led to too many suppliers in the world, and this is why a lot of them arnt making profits. to keep their electorate happy, governments subsidize them. in the US, 2% of the working population is farmers. buy subsisizing them, we are screwing over the other 98% of america, plus everyone in the third world.
then you talk about hard effects of capitalism. these farmers have so much more than people in the third world, its criminal to say that they need the help more then the people who are starving and dying of disease in the third world.

	10-03-2003 04:03									#74
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DanS That's last year's economic growth. Not this year's. Last year's deficit was roughly in line with economic growth as well. So far, this has been a good piece of work by the administration. Also, some luck.

US deficit when measured using the same definition as the EU uses (net lending): 3.5% in 2002, growth was 2.4%.

Average forecasts for deficit this year (assuming Bush's tax cuts go through) 4.3%, growth: 2.5%


You see DanS if you measure like with like (something that the US seems to be loathe to do) your guideline does not hold up.

	10-03-2003 04:05									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

this sounds familiar . . .

	10-03-2003 04:29									#76
	Got spare money?

Why do you think I changed my sig for the first time in 4 years

	10-03-2003 05:20									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia i disagree. increased productivity is not why the prices are falling. its increased number of suppliers. all of the third world countries are jumping on the export promotion bandwagon (largely due to IMF and world bankpolicies) and now concentrate on producing food. now increased amount of food means falling prices. on top of that, food is price inelastic, which means that as the price falls, people will not buy dramatically more. this situation has led to too many suppliers in the world, and this is why a lot of them arnt making profits. to keep their electorate happy, governments subsidize them. in the US, 2% of the working population is farmers. buy subsisizing them, we are screwing over the other 98% of america, plus everyone in the third world. then you talk about hard effects of capitalism. these farmers have so much more than people in the third world, its criminal to say that they need the help more then the people who are starving and dying of disease in the third world.

LoA,

Most third world countries don't produce enough food for export. Productivity improvements in the US are a reality.

	10-03-2003 05:32									#78
	Inflate your Upload Space

The situation with farming in the developed world is a scandal, I agree. When microscopic special interest groups like the British sugar beet industry can get their way, despite sugar beet being nothing more than a wartime relic, things have to change.

Unfortunately, few governments have the guts to face down the farmers.

	10-03-2003 05:35									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Sandman This thread isn't as daft as the 'Jews leaving France in record numbers', since there is a small problem, as opposed to a miniscule one.

It sounds like the Jews are all heading to Cote d'Ivoire to support those 300,000 troops.

	10-03-2003 05:47									#80
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Where do you get that Sikander? BTW even if Sandman doesn't prefers not to admite it there has been a marked increase in anti-semitism in France over the last two years and I would rather try to combat it now while it is small then wait until it possibly becomes much larger. The best time to deal with problems like this is to nip them in the bud and not to ignore them until the become huge problems like some people here have suggested.

	10-03-2003 08:30									#81
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

You see DanS if you measure like with like (something that the US seems to be loathe to do) your guideline does not hold up.

I'm just going with IMF's numbers. If you've got a problem with it, take it up with them.

	10-03-2003 09:08									#82
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DanS You see DanS if you measure like with like (something that the US seems to be loathe to do) your guideline does not hold up. I'm just going with IMF's numbers. If you've got a problem with it, take it up with them.

Why should I?
You are quoting a 5 month old forecast made by the IMF whilst I am quoting the actual figure.

If you can't be bothered to look up the data then you should not be surprised when people correct you.

	10-03-2003 09:14									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

If you can't be bothered to look up the data then you should not be surprised when people correct you.

I did look up the data. Apparently, the IMF removes those transactions in their calculations for the Euro area.

	10-03-2003 09:17									#84
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Let's clear this up once and for all.

Please post a link to the data you are talking about.

here is a link to what I am talking about - although admittedly I have estimated one component of this for Q4 2002 (corporate profits and tax accrurals) - but my previous estimates of this have never been out by more than 0.1% of GDP.

	10-03-2003 09:28									#85
	Support Apolyton

The World Economic Outlook, September. Pg. 16. Fn. 4.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft...df/chapter1.pdf

I recalled that Germany and France came in with higher deficits and lower growth than forecast in September. Either way, their deficits aren't tracking growth by any means, no matter how you peal your apples.

After you brought it up, I checked the NIPA accounts and remarked that on the large difference between the deficit and net lendings. Checking against the IMF, I could surmise that Germany's and France's delta between the two isn't nearly as large.

http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/T...r=2002&Freq=Qtr

Edit: You DanS'ed me.

	10-03-2003 09:35									#86
	Increase Your PM Length

Take it outside!!!

	10-03-2003 09:49									#87
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by DanS After you brought it up, I checked the NIPA accounts and remarked that on the large difference between the deficit and net lendings. Checking against the IMF, I could surmise that Germany's and France's delta between the two isn't nearly as large.

That's because the figure quoted for France and Germany is net lending - so if you are going to compare like with like you have to use the US government's net lending - not it's stated budget deficit.

The figure quoted in the IMF release is also net lending.

Have a look at the OECD data (which includes a forecast made just 3 months ago).

quote: Originally posted by Ted Striker Take it outside!!!

Not everyone is as gung-ho as you Ted, we are trying to clear up a misunderstanding amicably - not that i'd expect you to understand amicably though

	10-03-2003 09:54									#88
	Support Apolyton

Well I guess you amicabley showed me!

	10-03-2003 09:55									#89
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

nice to see a yankee detection of blatant irony

	10-03-2003 09:56									#90
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The figure quoted in the IMF release is also net lending.

For all three, or just Europe and France?