Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Great Grain Robbery (1972)

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#11

Post by ggreer »

londons_explore wrote: post #3

While in this case, the soviets came out ahead, the deal was not inherently unfair. It appears the price was set based on market rates on the day the deal was done. In effect, the USA just sold all the grain on that day, more than they actually had, not on the actual day of delivery. They just issued a futures contract. Had the price of grain fallen on world markets, the soviets would have lost out.

If the price of grain had fallen, the Soviet Union would have purchased it from other countries at market rates. Only after they had exhausted other countries' grain surpluses would they have bought from the US.

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#14

Post by magicsmoke »

valuearb wrote: post #12

Why would we subsidize the USSR during the Cold War? Why not require some political concessions first?

In the context of the times, the late 60s-early 70s were a time of political concession from both the USSR and the US. This was the Detente period of the Cold War, when the two sides were trying to sign nuclear arms treaties to avoid mutual annihilation like they faced during the Cuban missile crisis as well as the expense involved with making tens of thousands of nukes, and the US was trying to pull itself out of Vietnam and needed good relations with the USSR to make sure they wouldn't have to fight a 2nd Vietnam war if the USSR decided to push the spread of global communism. The grain export deal was just one piece in the puzzle.

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#15

Post by einpoklum »

ggreer wrote: post #11
londons_explore wrote: post #3

While in this case, the soviets came out ahead, the deal was not inherently unfair. It appears the price was set based on market rates on the day the deal was done. In effect, the USA just sold all the grain on that day, more than they actually had, not on the actual day of delivery. They just issued a futures contract. Had the price of grain fallen on world markets, the soviets would have lost out.

If the price of grain had fallen, the Soviet Union would have purchased it from other countries at market rates. Only after they had exhausted other countries' grain surpluses would they have bought from the US.

The GP is talking about prices falling after, not before, the purchase.

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#16

Post by einpoklum »

Wikipedia says that "The problem was heightened by the fact that only a small fraction of the Soviet Union was able to be farmed"

Really? I though that, until the mid-century at least, the vast majority of the population of the USSR were farmers.

I mean, ok, of course they grey other things as well, but still - that sounds strange.

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#17

Post by vijayr02 »

twic wrote: post #9
myself248 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in itself is a reference to a 1903 silent film The Great Train Robbery, widely considered to be the first of what we'd now recognize as an action film, and the first western.

The wikipedia article says: > The term Great Grain Robbery is a pun referring to the "Great Train Robbery" novel The novel in question being a 1975 one by Michael Crichton! Being British, to me, the term refers to an infamous train robbery in 1963. I don't know if that incident is well known in the US. Presumably, though, both those uses are references to the film.

Michael Crichton's novel references a British train robbery from Victorian times:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gold_Robbery

The 1903 movie referenced is a separate dramatisation of a US robbery:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Train_Robbery_(1903_...

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#18

Post by tragomaskhalos »

twic wrote: post #9
myself248 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in itself is a reference to a 1903 silent film The Great Train Robbery, widely considered to be the first of what we'd now recognize as an action film, and the first western.

The wikipedia article says: > The term Great Grain Robbery is a pun referring to the "Great Train Robbery" novel The novel in question being a 1975 one by Michael Crichton! Being British, to me, the term refers to an infamous train robbery in 1963. I don't know if that incident is well known in the US. Presumably, though, both those uses are references to the film.

The '63 train robbery indeed still holds an unhealthy spell over britons, part of our broader culture of lauding mavericks who get one over on the system, even if they happen to be unpleasant / violent criminals. Probably the same in the US when put like that I suppose. A less commonly recounted aspect of the Great Train Robbery is how incompetent the perps were and how easily caught

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#19

Post by folli »

londons_explore wrote: post #3

While in this case, the soviets came out ahead, the deal was not inherently unfair. It appears the price was set based on market rates on the day the deal was done. In effect, the USA just sold all the grain on that day, more than they actually had, not on the actual day of delivery. They just issued a futures contract. Had the price of grain fallen on world markets, the soviets would have lost out.

I think the point is that the market rate was "unfair" (depending on your definition of fairness), as it was based on massively assymetric information.

Re: Great Grain Robbery (1972)

#20

Post by dmos62 »

einpoklum wrote: post #16

Wikipedia says that "The problem was heightened by the fact that only a small fraction of the Soviet Union was able to be farmed" Really? I though that, until the mid-century at least, the vast majority of the population of the USSR were farmers. I mean, ok, of course they grey other things as well, but still - that sounds strange.

Yeah, not sure what to make of that. Apparently this is a reference to the black earth belt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernozem). The article isn't particularly well written. Why only the Chernozem belt can be farmed (short term climate conditions maybe?)? What kind of mismanagement USSR exhibited that led to massive grain shortage on their end?
Post reply on HN