Hacker News Reader

Comment by justrealist | Hacker News Reader

US bulk agriculture exports are what keep vast swathes of the developing world from starving. GMOs, herbicides and pesticides are how the US produces immense quantities of cheap food for the rest of the world [1].

I don't really care what the rest of the world whines about, when the US is the country actually keeping millions of the global poor alive.

[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/international-markets-u-s-tr...

View on HN

US bulk agriculture exports are what keep vast swathes of the developing world from sustaining themselves. Wheat, corn and other heavily subsidized crops are how countries are incentivized producing cash crops like coffee, tea and Kat instead of food.

I don't really understand why the rest of the world doesn't whine, when the US is the country actually keeping millions of the global population poor.

Thomas Sankara said it better: https://twitter.com/Beardington/status/1685213481010667520?s...

No. The US (and European) ag subsidies are what fuel overproduction, undermine local production and markets in other countries, creating dependencies and poor diets.

Ah yes. If only the US didn't sell food to subsaharan Africa, they'd learn to pull themselves up by their bootstraps! It's really the handouts that makes them dependent on the US government.

The horseshoe theory of politics truly explains a lot.

This is literally what happened in Haiti with rice. Even Slick Willie finally apologized for it.

https://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/11/bill_clinton_s_trade...

Overproduction? Of food?

Yes. Specific foods. Such as corn, sugar and soybean.

“The US sugar program relies on import quotas and limits on domestic production to ensure domestic prices for raw and refined sugar are, on average, about 100% higher than world prices.

4,000 or so farms that raise sugar beet and sugarcane, many of which also plant most of their cropland to other heavily subsidized commodities such as corn and soybeans.”

https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/recapping-the-e...

> and limits on domestic production

How can you possibly be arguing that limits on domestic production are causing overproduction?

They cause overproduction of poor substitutes. Like beets for sugar because of limits on sugar cane. Or monoculture GMO corn for HFCS. This skews diets and prices, usually for the worst.

The production limits effectively cap how much subsidy will be paid. The subsidy is still there. Without it, there would be less sugar grown and the land involved (mostly in the Florida Everglades and specifically developed to suit this sugar program) would go to other uses

> I don't really care what the rest of the world whines about

thank you for clarifying your point of view so well

To be fair, you’re quoting only half the sentence when the second part of that sentence justifies/qualifies it rather well.

Justification for indifference is on par with justification for ignorance, only is more nihilistic in its apathy for others and their plight. If you seek justification to not care about a thing which others care about, your interaction with them is patently malevolent. If, indeed, care is not given, then no statement should be made, and shutting up is how to be both honest and accurate.

It really doesn't. The person is saying it's OK to poison the US environment because we get good boy points for feeding the rest of the world (something the US does help with, but which impact is exaggerated for rhetorical effect). Apparently they're objecting to the fact that his research comes from a European institution and labeling that as 'whining'.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com