<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Until real middle-class wages start rising, we can’t end agricultural subsidies]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/ Mon, 16 Feb 2009 01:56:49 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/1 How to restart middle-class wage growth

The single most important process is to rebuild the manufacturing sector.  Without that, nothing else is possible, as I have argued.  How to do that?  By building a green infrastructure -- you know the drill, high-speed rail, transit, wind turbines, solar panels, retrofitting materials.  

There would need to be a way to keep the manufacturing inside the US, thus "domestic content" laws -- because much if not most of this construction would have to be financed by the government, since the private sector isn't doing it's job.  The WTO allows for domestic content for "general infrastructure", so counter debates in Congress, there shouldn't be problem there.  And foreign companies would make plenty of money, because they'd have to do much of the work here, since American companies have been asleep at the switch and haven't had the encouragement that foreign countries have provided.

With a big shift to manufacturing, you would have the middle class jobs , andyou'd also have twice the number of service jobs (as I discuss here) that depend on all of those manufactured things that aren't manufactured here anymore.

And of course, we'd have to pass laws mandating recycling and minimizing pollution and energy-use from manufacturing, and provide the renewable energy needed for the manufacturing -- yet more middle class jobs.

Then people could afford organic food (that is, the kind of food people's grandparents used to take for granted), and we could shut down industrial agriculture.

Is that worth a gajillion dollars?

]]> How to restart middle-class wage growth

The single most important process is to rebuild the manufacturing sector.  Without that, nothing else is possible, as I have argued.  How to do that?  By building a green infrastructure -- you know the drill, high-speed rail, transit, wind turbines, solar panels, retrofitting materials.  

There would need to be a way to keep the manufacturing inside the US, thus "domestic content" laws -- because much if not most of this construction would have to be financed by the government, since the private sector isn't doing it's job.  The WTO allows for domestic content for "general infrastructure", so counter debates in Congress, there shouldn't be problem there.  And foreign companies would make plenty of money, because they'd have to do much of the work here, since American companies have been asleep at the switch and haven't had the encouragement that foreign countries have provided.

With a big shift to manufacturing, you would have the middle class jobs , andyou'd also have twice the number of service jobs (as I discuss here) that depend on all of those manufactured things that aren't manufactured here anymore.

And of course, we'd have to pass laws mandating recycling and minimizing pollution and energy-use from manufacturing, and provide the renewable energy needed for the manufacturing -- yet more middle class jobs.

Then people could afford organic food (that is, the kind of food people's grandparents used to take for granted), and we could shut down industrial agriculture.

Is that worth a gajillion dollars?

]]> Comment #2 by Sharon Astyk http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/ Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:31:42 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/2 The Other Possibility

Is that industrial agriculture will not remain cheap either, and that we won't have much middle class.  Both the reality of cheap food and of a huge middle class are quite unusual in our society - in most societies, food is one of the big expenditures, while cost of say, housing (and the quality thereof), falls in proportion, because no one has much money for anything else.

I'm not convinced that industrial agriculture can or will produce cheap food for much longer - at least not the food we've become accustomed to. In which case, reform can and should start with "if it isn't cheap, what good is it?" question.

Sharon Astyk

Sharon, with dirt under her fingernails.

]]> The Other Possibility

Is that industrial agriculture will not remain cheap either, and that we won't have much middle class.  Both the reality of cheap food and of a huge middle class are quite unusual in our society - in most societies, food is one of the big expenditures, while cost of say, housing (and the quality thereof), falls in proportion, because no one has much money for anything else.

I'm not convinced that industrial agriculture can or will produce cheap food for much longer - at least not the food we've become accustomed to. In which case, reform can and should start with "if it isn't cheap, what good is it?" question.

Sharon Astyk

Sharon, with dirt under her fingernails.

]]> Comment #3 by barthanderson http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/ Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:25:30 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/3 higher wages = more crap-food?

Maybe I'm cynical, but don't higher wages simply encourage higher prices at the manufacturing level due to increased demand of what we already have? In other words, higher wages lead to more expensive crap-food?

That said, I think you're right, Tom. Higher wages are definitely part of the equation, but without another viable food system in which to make money, factory farmers and industrial "food" manufacturers won't see fit to jump ship from the old one. They'll just keep turning the garbage-mill.

I do think we're getting closer to real change. The interlocked network of local foodsheds (that is, a decentralized, national-local food system) is the best model that I can imagine -- increased food safety, an enriched rural economy, better nutrition and healthful ingredients, etc -- but the feds and/or big bidness needs to invest in it dramatically to make it more viable.  

As you said, it's a chicken-and-the-egg proposition. I just think we need to address supply and demand simultaneously or real change won't take effect.

]]> higher wages = more crap-food?

Maybe I'm cynical, but don't higher wages simply encourage higher prices at the manufacturing level due to increased demand of what we already have? In other words, higher wages lead to more expensive crap-food?

That said, I think you're right, Tom. Higher wages are definitely part of the equation, but without another viable food system in which to make money, factory farmers and industrial "food" manufacturers won't see fit to jump ship from the old one. They'll just keep turning the garbage-mill.

I do think we're getting closer to real change. The interlocked network of local foodsheds (that is, a decentralized, national-local food system) is the best model that I can imagine -- increased food safety, an enriched rural economy, better nutrition and healthful ingredients, etc -- but the feds and/or big bidness needs to invest in it dramatically to make it more viable.  

As you said, it's a chicken-and-the-egg proposition. I just think we need to address supply and demand simultaneously or real change won't take effect.

]]> Comment #4 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/ Tue, 17 Feb 2009 01:51:51 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/A-plague-of-Wal-Marts/4 America 1/3 obese, 1/3 fat

Savings in healthcare costs would most likely make up for higher food costs if quality of food and quality of life were the primary concerns of the food system.  

High fructose corn syrup and high fat meat, it's byproduct, are the main products of our sickening food culture.

With a "free" market system of food production and healthcare could we expect any better result?  Most likely this modern plague will gradually infect every nation that adopts corporatist industrial governance.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> America 1/3 obese, 1/3 fat

Savings in healthcare costs would most likely make up for higher food costs if quality of food and quality of life were the primary concerns of the food system.  

High fructose corn syrup and high fat meat, it's byproduct, are the main products of our sickening food culture.

With a "free" market system of food production and healthcare could we expect any better result?  Most likely this modern plague will gradually infect every nation that adopts corporatist industrial governance.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]>