Comments icu814me has made

So then you are completely unclear.

"It would be a serious error for you to assume we agree on anything."

You use taxes, subsidies, and tariffs to attack my argument, but then back away from advocating their abolishment. Please be clear. Do you in fact believe that these policies contribute to problems in the price of grains and the limited availability of the same?

If you do, say you do. If you don't, be clear there.

I'm putting my cards on the table, not simply looking for cracks in peoples arguments or analogies. If you have a serious disagreement with my point, make a better alternate argument. Pointing out "you missed a spot" is not landscaping.

So all I know now is you don't want to agree on anything. That's unfortunate. My target is metaphysical reality, and I welcome anyone from any other perspective who has some agreement with me on any of those points. Michael and I have at least found some common ground already on his own site.

Would you prefer this simply remains a club of like minded people patting each other on the back?On A gap between rich and poor makes free markets fail posted 1 year, 7 months ago 34 Responses

Porshe follow-up

"First, you're not trading w/ the Porsche owner down the street. Second, there are no subsidies or tariffs b/w you two. Third, he hasnt used subsidized, artificially cheap product to dominate the market."

So, I assume then that we agree we are both in favor of no subsidies, no taxation, no tariffs, and no trade restrictions?  I'm all for that. The price of rice would drop immediately.

All thats fine, but it didn't really have anything to do with my points by example, which to reiterate are: (1) Wealth is not a pie, or zero sum game. And (2) The reason others do not have rice are related to their wealth, and artificial modification to the market incentive to produce. (3) It has nothing to do with whatever uses I decide are appropriate for the rice I buy- including feeding it to a delicious cow, or simply burning it, or making a mattress out of it. On A gap between rich and poor makes free markets fail posted 1 year, 7 months ago 34 Responses

Price of rice no longer nice

Corn and rice are on peoples susbtitution curves / indifference curves. As the price of corn increase due to subsidy, demand will increase for rice, raising the price. That parts pretty simple.

Some assumptions above that concern me:

Wealth is not a pizza. If you get two slices, it does not mean there are fewer for me. Wealth is created by introducing value to the market, and has for practical purpose and boundary that no one can define.

This idea that we're all hungry savages increasingly fighting over a smaller heap of goods is iron age (at best) philosophy. There are essentially two philosophies of wealth. Roaming hordes of nomads believed that the only way to gain wealth was to take it from someone else. This belief still exists in the middle east, in the Q'ran, and in freshman dorms, Democratic campaign headquarters, and Marxists who live in their parents garage.

The other view is that wealth is created by humans, who are also the consumers. If you believe this (which I do) it should come as no surprise that over the course of history, [relatively] free trade has allowed innovation and competitive advantage to stretch the availability of food to more people while also using fewer resources.

At one time, almost every person in the US was a farmer, in reality about 96%. As recent as 1900, about 40% of the US was dedicated to farming. Now, approximately 2% of the US farms. The food is also safer, more nutritious, and lasts longer. The work is easier, safer, and takes less time.

There is certainly more then enough food to go around, and with the incentive, we could certainly increase the bounty to meet demand at market.

The next problem I see in the info above is this artificial construct of me at Ruth's Chris and a starving Haitian watching me eat. How dare I eat a steak. It is not readily apparent to me how the Haitian starving is directly attributable to me having a steak. He doesn't "not have it" because I do have it.

I don't have a Porshe, but it's not because the guy living down the road has "mine". The guy down the road is a doctor, or lawyer, or professional poker player. His production value is much higher than mine. There are many reasons for this, some individual and some infrastructural. Within a few years, I could overcome the individual and probably get my own Porshe. I am able to do so because of the infrastructural abilities.

The Haitian has many people much closer to him that are responsible for his infrastructural ability to increase his production value. I can assure you, if he could bring sufficient value to market, he could get his hands on some rice. Or steak. Or Boca Burgers, whatever he likes.

The inability to get rice to this guy has nothing to do with whether I eat cow.

Rice, like oil, is a heavily regulated market. Increased freedom in trade would find the lowest possible market price for rice. That's one end of the problem. Trade, and infrastructural changes would also allow that Haitian to exponentially increase his production value. As a consequence, he would have more disposable income, and the man could get him some rice.

The arguments above sound a lot like my mother at the dinner table when I was in elementary school, when she told me to finish my plate because there were starving children in China. I think they have as much validity. Neither I at the table in years past, or at the restaurant today can "PUSH" food up the consumer supply chain to someone else.   On A gap between rich and poor makes free markets fail posted 1 year, 7 months ago 34 Responses