View Single Post
  #174   Report Post  
Old 19-05-2003, 01:44 AM
David G. Bell
 
Posts: n/a
Default UK farm profitability to jun 2002

On Friday, in article

"Torsten Brinch" wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:39:41 +0000 (GMT),

("David G. Bell") wrote:

On Thursday, in article

"Torsten Brinch" wrote:


One can't argue against all subsidy, it is inherent that each and
every specific case of subsidy might arguably have demonstrable
benefits to society. It is important to realise, however, that
it is no longer considered beneficial to society to subsidise farm
production.


Why?

Saying "free market" is not an explanation.


No, it is the assumed default among reasonable men. It is the
presence, not the absence of a subsidy that must have a special
explanation attached to it. It does not make sense to ask, why some
enterprise should -not- have a subsidy.


Sir, you are begging the question.


--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.