Sugar Farmers hope for help from Congress

Good post LSUCraig. This seems so obvious, but apparently it's not. "Global economy" is not just a buzzword. Supply and demand dictates that cheap labor will get the jobs they are qualified for. If non-cheap labor wants the same low-level jobs, they're going to be SOL. Of course, they could expand their skills and get a job that the overseas workers are not qualified for, but most would rather whine to the government.

 

Link

 

Sugar cane farmers do not recieve government subsidies. Not one penny of taxpayer money. Corn, wheat, cotton, rice and soybeans are supported by $19 billion in taxpayer subsidies, but sugar cane is not.

Just to save you the time in looking it up, I'll tell you the other side too.

The arguement has nothing to do with direct costs to taxpayers in taxes. There are none. The arguement is that there is a "hidden" tax in the price of candy, softdrinks, etc. due to the controlled price of sugar. For example, with free trade a coke would cost 1.00 instead of 1.05. Thats the argued cost of sugar.

This is also bs, since everyone knows damn well that the candy and drink companies aren't going to lower their prices when people are paying what the prices are now, the money is just gonna go from the sugar people to the candy and drink companies.


**I interned in DC this summer and had to sit in and take notes at some of the CAFTA hearings, thats why I know about this; I got to hear from both sides, and even though obviously, being from a sugar-cane farming part of Louisiana, I lean toward that pro-sugar side, even when trying to look from a nuetral standpoint it still seems likes sugar is getting f-d.

 

And nobody's addressed this yet so I'll throw it back out there.

 

i dont follow your argument. i am aware that companies sell items for profits. what are you advocating?

 

this cafta sounds good to me. i dont want to manipulate labor laws in other countries, i just want to get sugar as cheaply as possible.

 

The arguement is this-
Proponents of CAFTA say CAFTA will make things cheaper for American Citizens- otherwise it would not be worth doing.

Drink companies will not lower the prices, since, as you say, they sell items for profits, and they will not lower the price if the demand does not dictate that as necessary. So the things will not become cheaper for americans, so CAFTA did not serve its purpose.

If you would rather Coca-cola have your extra .02 instead of the sugar cane industry, then thats fine. All I'm saying is that CAFTA will not make your sugar-containing products any cheaper.

 

Thats fine too.
But thats not the arguement that the big CAFTA supporters in Washington are saying. They are saying this is a chance for us to help out our poor nieghbors in their efforts to keep pace with the rest of the world, and that we cannot turn our backs on them. Personally I don't give a **** if the 'spics get paid at all- its just pretty hypocritical to say this helps them (which is what almost all of the senators and reps who support it are saying) and then design it to lower labor standards.

 

exactly my thoughts. what wins out is the cheapest prices regardless. if it takes kathy lee sweatshops to do it thats fine as long as it lowers the price.

hell i love the fact 5 yr old mexicans get a chance to work and make something of themselves for a nickel a day.