I have always claimed that it is impossible to make a "national defense" argument for trade protection for U.S. sugar producers. But this guy does just that. And his argument....I pause with a sense of enormous respect for his courage.... his argument is that without trade protection for U.S. sugar producers, the price of sugar would be....too high! Because there would be an OSEC (Organization of Sugar Exporting Countries, modeled after OPEC). Seriously. He says that.
You have got to read this for yourself. A brilliant piece of work. Grand Game, people!
A Conservative Case for Sugar Tariffs.
You have got to read this for yourself. A brilliant piece of work. Grand Game, people!
A Conservative Case for Sugar Tariffs.
7 comments:
unsurprisingly, Mr Rooney's second-largest financial donor in '11 - '12 was ...
US Sugar :)
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00029018
He also received the most PAC contributions from the 'Crop Production & Basic Processing' industry.
Hey, wait a minute. It turns out that Rep. Rooney's district produces 75% of Florida's sugar cane! And Florida is the country's top cane producer! I'm starting to think this isn't a coincidence. But on to his argument; Brazil controls the world's sugar supply. They are abusing that market power by....uh....giving sugar away to the world at rock bottom prices. Because they only pay 50 cents an hour for labor. And that's why Europe now pays so little -- wait, he says they pay too much. And if we allow them to sell into the U.S. without added tariffs, we too will have higher prices and rationing. Rationing because demand will be too high to meet, given the high price and unfettered supply once tariffs are lifted...Did I miss something in my Urban Micro Economics class?
Which direction do the supply and demand curves go in your world?
Hey, Pelsmin! Aren't you one of those "dangerous Jews" I keep hearing about? http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/27/hungarian-parliamentarian-wants-governme
No wonder you have all these wrong ideas....
142,000 jobs!
As though the real estate devoted to cane production would just sit idle.
I've not been to Florida cane country, but I've been to Louisiana cane country often. That land would be repurposed within seconds.
The guy is a Republican in Florida, can't he see all the golf courses?
I spent nine months in Mauritius, a country that depends on sugar. It like many other cane producing countries is full of poor people.
The odd thing about Mauritius is that I found most of their desserts or sweets lacking in sugar!
And, it operates without a federal budget outlay, which means it doesn’t cost taxpayers a dime.
From TFA: "do we want a domestic industry to help supply an ingredient that’s essential to the U.S. food supply...? The answer should be obvious."
I pause to question whether cane sugar is "essential" to food. Historically, it wasn't so long ago that sugar was a rare treat. So, Rooney is right about one thing: the answer is obvious: NO! It's sad that Brazilian legislators are wasting their people's wealth trying for the demonstrably impossible, a stable monopoly in a world market. Those guys must be as stupid as ... as... as U.S. legislators!
Mungowitz,
Saw the story on Hungary. I don't see why the local Jews would object to the government collecting their names and locations. What's the worst that could happen? Besides, the Jews make up nearly a quarter of the population of Budapest (Cite: 1939 Fact Book -- haven't checked if there are any updates.) Safety in numbers.
As for Mr. Gyongyosi, the most dangerous Jew he'll face will come the next time he needs to go in for a colonoscopy or liver biopsy. "Count backwards from 10, Marton. Oops!"
Post a Comment