Live data from Hacker News

World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

bloomberg.com

41–50 of 54 posts

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#41
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to get off topic (but to support your point), I once read an op-ed that made an argument that the increase in obesity (in the USA) was due to farm subsidies. That is, cheap corn is used to make high-fructose corn syrup, and that low cost sweetener in turn ends up in everything. And of course, as you mentioned, grains make cows, pigs, etc. cheaper. Again, not ideal for the human body and even less so for Mother Na…

There is also a national security issue to make sure a nation can feed itself. The government's responsibility is towards long term sustainable food supply for it's citizens.

Still, subsidies given do not really indicate long-term sustainable food supply. The most efficient way to guarantee food for the population is by growing plants directly.

If it turns out that the farmer that uses the water for his grain fed factory-farm animals, then the allocation of that money was useless.

There's much more protein/carbs/fiber calories per energy wasted in vegetables than it is in meat in the case of factory farmed meat.

To me it just looks as if luxury foods like meat have large industry players that have influenced the law and the politicians to get subsidies they need to keep their products as cheap as ordinary poor-man food (potatoes, beans, dark greens etc.).

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#42
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to get off topic (but to support your point), I once read an op-ed that made an argument that the increase in obesity (in the USA) was due to farm subsidies. That is, cheap corn is used to make high-fructose corn syrup, and that low cost sweetener in turn ends up in everything. And of course, as you mentioned, grains make cows, pigs, etc. cheaper. Again, not ideal for the human body and even less so for Mother Na…

There is also a national security issue to make sure a nation can feed itself. The government's responsibility is towards long term sustainable food supply for it's citizens.

Feed itself? Yes. The problem is Uncle Sam has overshot that and now the majority of adults are over-feeding themselves.

Note: I understand the rise of obesity is a more complicated than overeating. That said, you don't get obese by under-eating.

p.s. Ironic that obesity has been declared a threat to national security. That is, we're too fat to fight.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While subsidies might be incentivizing waste, this is better than the alternative, which is not having enough food. The "free market" solution to take food out of people's table is a very good way to have some politicians at the gallows in no time (see Arab Spring)

> The "free market" solution Free market agriculture has been far more successful at eliminating hunger than any other system.

That's blatantly false. The US, Europe, China, Japan and every top agricultural nation subsidizes agriculture.

Subsidized agriculture has been responsible for pretty much ending hunger in most of the world. Free market agriculture hasn't been responsible for ending any hunger.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "free market" solution Free market agriculture has been far more successful at eliminating hunger than any other system.

That's blatantly false. The US, Europe, China, Japan and every top agricultural nation subsidizes agriculture. Subsidized agriculture has been responsible for pretty much ending hunger in most of the world. Free market agriculture hasn't been responsible for ending any hunger.

In the USA, welfare spending dwarfs farm subsidies by a factor of >50. No doubt this is true elsewhere, too. Private ownership of agriculture is what ended hunger. Its effect has been shown quite convincingly in Massachusetts and China.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "free market" solution Free market agriculture has been far more successful at eliminating hunger than any other system.

Every country heavily subsidizes and protects their agriculture market. There is no free market in agriculture. World hunger has not been 'solved' and any success cannot simply be credited to 'free markets' for a such a large scale complex human social problem.

The subsidies are actually minuscule, compared to welfare spending and other transfer payments to the needy.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's blatantly false. The US, Europe, China, Japan and every top agricultural nation subsidizes agriculture. Subsidized agriculture has been responsible for pretty much ending hunger in most of the world. Free market agriculture hasn't been responsible for ending any hunger.

In the USA, welfare spending dwarfs farm subsidies by a factor of >50. No doubt this is true elsewhere, too. Private ownership of agriculture is what ended hunger. Its effect has been shown quite convincingly in Massachusetts and China.

> In the USA, welfare spending dwarfs farm subsidies by a factor of >50.

That depends on what you count as a "subsidy". Are all the roads, dams, diverting of rivers, etc counted as "subsidies"?

> Its effect has been shown quite convincingly in Massachusetts and China.

Modern subsidized agriculture in both countries has quite convincingly showed it.

Not sure why you are now moving the goalpost to welfare.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "free market" solution Free market agriculture has been far more successful at eliminating hunger than any other system.

That's blatantly false. The US, Europe, China, Japan and every top agricultural nation subsidizes agriculture. Subsidized agriculture has been responsible for pretty much ending hunger in most of the world. Free market agriculture hasn't been responsible for ending any hunger.

The US didn't always have agricultural subsidies. Hunger in the US was virtually eliminated before the Civil War. Agricultural subsidies did not happen until after WW1.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's blatantly false. The US, Europe, China, Japan and every top agricultural nation subsidizes agriculture. Subsidized agriculture has been responsible for pretty much ending hunger in most of the world. Free market agriculture hasn't been responsible for ending any hunger.

The US didn't always have agricultural subsidies. Hunger in the US was virtually eliminated before the Civil War. Agricultural subsidies did not happen until after WW1.

You could argue that government help in wiping out the natives and stealing their land and giving it to the white settlers is an agricultural subsidy. It's true that we've never had persistent hunger in the US. But that's cause we stole all the natives land. The natives however suffered tremendous hunger/starvation though.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US didn't always have agricultural subsidies. Hunger in the US was virtually eliminated before the Civil War. Agricultural subsidies did not happen until after WW1.

You could argue that government help in wiping out the natives and stealing their land and giving it to the white settlers is an agricultural subsidy. It's true that we've never had persistent hunger in the US. But that's cause we stole all the natives land. The natives however suffered tremendous hunger/starvation though.

> But that's cause we stole all the natives land.

Archaeological bone evidence of the pre-Columbian Indians is that they periodically had famines. Having land is not a sufficient condition for having a consistent, sufficient food supply.

The US, around 1800, was the first country in history to achieve a consistent food surplus.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "free market" solution Free market agriculture has been far more successful at eliminating hunger than any other system.

Every country heavily subsidizes and protects their agriculture market. There is no free market in agriculture. World hunger has not been 'solved' and any success cannot simply be credited to 'free markets' for a such a large scale complex human social problem.

Hunger is a solved problem everywhere there is a free market.

It makes sense for countries to protect their domestic food production as a military asset - cutting off the food supply is a common warfare tactic. Subsidies also come about because of powerful agricultural lobbying interests. As to if subsidies reduce hunger, the evidence is scant to none. There is plenty of evidence, however, that they result in inefficient misallocation of resources, such as water.

Post reply on HN