On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:41:31 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In article , Torsten Brinch
writes
Huh? What I read you as saying is that the number of farmers has been
something like a linear function of the subsidy -- each time the
subsidy was increased, the number of farmers/farmworkers went up, such
that per head income remained at a low level.

Er.. no. The number of farmers is decreasing steadily. Because food is
in surplus and there are plenty of willing farmers there is no need for
govt. to apply financial incentives.

?! You were commenting (quote below) the perceived problem, that
farmers are falling behind in income, leading to the aim of the common
agriculture policy, CAP, to attempt to bring farmers up to some form
of income parity with the rest of society. You commented that this
problem cannot be resolved by CAP because -- because --- because
what??

****
The practical policy has been dominated by attempts to increase farmer
income, implicitly aiming at bringing it -- from a falling behind
position -- to parity with other income groups of society.

This is not resolvable. Farmers choose to farm and go to extreme lengths
to stay in business. Most other professions are rewarded by the
supply/demand system.
****