View Single Post
  #24   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2011, 10:05 AM posted to uk.rec.gardening
Ian B[_3_] Ian B[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Aug 2010
Posts: 125
Default Poor old Farmers ............ again :-(

wrote:
In article ,
Janet writes


You can't keep propping up businesses on emotive arguments about
doe-eyed cows and sad farmers.


Nobody did. The supermarkets, having cornered the market in retail
milk sales, collectively stopped paying a fair price to farmers for
what they produce, so that they could rake off a doubled profit for
themselves. It is fantastical, that these same supermarkets woo customers
consciences with "fair trade" exotic goods such as tea and coffee,
with a promise that the third world producers get a fair deal and
can make a reasonable living. At the same time supermarkets
manipulate the milk market to deny the same fair deal to UK home
producers.


I'm afraid you seem to be arguing with an advocate of a totally free
market. The market is king. Make a profit and damn the consequences.
etc.


The consequences of everyone trying to get the best deal is a general
improvement. How hard is that?

So I suspect that any argument to try and point out that the results
of this are almost always unpleasant and bad for society is likely to
go unheard.


This is simply ridiculous. The results of this are a general improvement.
What do you think happens if you tell people not to seek a profit?

Do a simple thought experiment. Tell shoppers they aren't allowed to seek
the best deal. What happens?

Profit at any cost, making a killing and taking advantage for personal
gain seem to be the only principles.


Yes. Because that's how people work. Even you. Faced with two identical
products, and one is cheaper, which one do you buy? Why is that? Would your
life be improved if the government ordered you to buy the more expensive
one? How?

For example, the implied comment on welfare and safety - 'there's your
problem...'. Such things are just an impediment to raking it in.


It was quite clear what that meant. The government forces our farmers to
waste more resources on their cows than foreign ones. Result: the foreign
milk is cheaper. That's a regulation problem.

There *are* reasons for regulations in certain areas. The sharks in
the market need to be controlled - it isn't a choice of either free
market or communism, despite Ian's implication.


Actually it is. You see, everyone has a reason to want the State to protect
them- it's always "just me, just this one thing". So it ends up with
everybody demanding the State fix prices, and that does indeed end up
shading into communism. And then, the economy falls apart, and they say,
"oh, that ghastly free market".

The fact that unregulated markets result in valueless speculation
becoming an industry in itself is either ignored or, worse, justified
- despite it being damaging for all but the speculators.


Ah the old "it's the speculators' fault" fallacy. Free market speculation is
fine, because when it's done badly it collapses and the speculators lose
their money; otherwise it's good as it diverts capital to the right places.
But you have to understand economics to understand that.

Just remember that you're actually arguing for scarcity of goods in the
marketplace. You are arguing for higher prices, and less wealth for every
man Jack and woman Jill in the country; to satisfy your own preferences.
That's actually a pretty despicable thing to do, when you get down to it.
You want to pay more and have less, you go for it. But don't drag the rest
of us down with you.


Ian