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

EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

dw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 184 posts

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#161

Post by oulipo2 »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #70
oulipo2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now the current system is totally inefficient, with a lot of food waste, and a lot of ruined landscapes and soil because of pollution and intrants We need on the contrary to produce less globally, but more organically, and to reduce waste and produce locally

It may be inefficient, but protectionism is never a solution and we are not yet in a state where food is abundant and accessible to everyone.

On the contrary, it's quite apparent today that globalization and free borders have largely failed the people, and that some amount of protectionism should be put back in place

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#162

Post by tpm »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #100

I am from a country (Ireland) that has a huge agricultural sector so I sympathise with the argument that this will be bad for European farmers. That said, food production in the EU is already largely kept alive by subsidies so if this deal makes life more difficult for farmers I can see the result being higher subsidies to compensate rather than the large scale closure of European farms. Which obviously isn't great b…

I am from a country with a not so huge agricultural sector (Slovakia) and think that anything that brings food prices down while not hugely affecting quality will be good. Food in the EU is overpriced relative to the rest of the world. There are reasons for that I can understand but still.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#163

Post by gus_massa »

Saline9515 wrote: post #112
ivan_gammel wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does not.

Who controls it though? A lot of non-compliant products are imported from China in plain sight, as there are 0 control and LATAM countries have no incentives in enforcing it.

There are already a lot of special cases like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilton_Quota

Local producers follow the rules, dot theit i and cross their t, because it's more profitable to sell the premium parts of the cow to Europe and the rest in the local market.

There are controls here and also when it arrives to Europe.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#164

Post by ivan_gammel »

oulipo2 wrote: post #161
ivan_gammel wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be inefficient, but protectionism is never a solution and we are not yet in a state where food is abundant and accessible to everyone.

On the contrary, it's quite apparent today that globalization and free borders have largely failed the people, and that some amount of protectionism should be put back in place

No, it is not apparent. Globalization has driven economic growth in a lot of countries, both developing and developed. There’s steady increase in HDI everywhere, decrease in extreme poverty, less hunger, better education etc etc. Nothing of that would be possible in postcolonial protectionist world. What you are talking about as reasonable amount isn’t protectionist, it’s just a sane set of domestic policies (welfare, education, industrial policy etc) that help countries to survive and grow in globalized world. There’s a difference between gatekeeping local markets and steering local industries for better competition and consumer protection. The latter just sets strict rules, but still allows global players to participate. Automotive sector has plenty of examples like that.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#165

Post by pousada »

oytis wrote: post #130
pousada wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common meme but wrong. The imported goods are subject to the same restrictions as those produced within EU. What hurts EU farmers the most is the big supermarket cartel that controls prices and pushes farmers to produce more and more cheaply (and consumers that react extremely sensitive to every price increase, but that’s a more inconvenient truth)

That's like an anti-cartel, a cartel that keeps the consumer prices low. With 12 euro/kg currently I wouldn't call beef in Germany extremely cheap on the world scale. Poultry has pretty much crossed the 10 euro mark too.

Definition of a cartel is a combination of independent commercial or industrial enterprises designed to limit competition or fix prices - it can be a cartel that basically oppresses farmers and have low consumer prices as result

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#166

Post by peterashford »

nephihaha wrote: post #154
comrade1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm sure there is a Wikipedia page on it. Fact remains that the PRC is a one party dictatorship which has pioneered a social credit system. Not exactly internal free trade and its international trade agreements will have strings attached.

NZ has had a free trade agreement with China since 2009. It has no strings attached in the sense of restrictions that we would not want.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#167

Post by Saline9515 »

gus_massa wrote: post #163
Saline9515 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who controls it though? A lot of non-compliant products are imported from China in plain sight, as there are 0 control and LATAM countries have no incentives in enforcing it.

There are already a lot of special cases like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilton_Quota Local producers follow the rules, dot theit i and cross their t, because it's more profitable to sell the premium parts of the cow to Europe and the rest in the local market. There are controls here and also when it arrives to Europe.

Most of the cheaper honey you can buy in the EU is imported from China, and is fake, made from glucose syrup. The EU has tried to "regulate", but chinese producers don't care, no one except consumer groups and beekeeper unions pay for tests.

Maybe in ten years, when most EU beekeepers will have thrown the towel and moved to other occupations, the EU will act and forbid imports. But until then, well eat overpriced glucose syrup.

If fraud as blatant and old is tolerated, what do you think happens with meat, where controls are much harder if not impossible when dealing with things such as animal wellness?

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#168

Post by mmooss »

raffael_de wrote: post #149

One might think that the importance of self-reliance with respect to essential resources is something to be learned from the past years. So, I'm not sure it's such a great idea to harm our local food production and import via the Atlantic ocean instead.

'Self-reliance' is an emotional appeal by nationalists to roll back free trade and other international cooperation.

International cooperation brings great wealth and security, and a diversification of resources. Should each EU country also go it alone? Internationalists have built the most free, prosperous, and secure world that has ever been seen. It's hard to see how the recent nationalist, anti-trade governments have improved things for themselves or for the world.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#169

Post by mmooss »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #109
exceptione wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food security is the last concern for Europe. How do you get that idea? > And EU farmers are subject to a ridiculous number of regulations and costs. Almost the whole EU budget is for agriculture subsidies. Countries outside EU have to comply with the same standards. The US could for instance export in bulk to the EU, if they would manage to bring food up to basic standards. It doesn't happen, but is not because the…

> Food security is the last concern for Europe. How do you get that idea? Food security is the first concern for every society, because without food we will all die. The reason almost the whole EU budget (hyperbole, but indeed it is a lot of the EU budget) is spent on agricultural subsidies is precisely to protect our food security.

> Food security is the first concern for every society, because without food we will all die.

It depends on what you mean by "first concern". Water security is the first concern by that reasoning; nuclear attack security too - without it, everyone dies.

But those aren't serious concerns in any practical sense: In most places in Europe there is plenty of water and food, and attention and resources are rightfully directed elsewhere.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#170

Post by nix-zarathustra »

tpm wrote: post #162
NoboruWataya wrote: post #100

I am from a country (Ireland) that has a huge agricultural sector so I sympathise with the argument that this will be bad for European farmers. That said, food production in the EU is already largely kept alive by subsidies so if this deal makes life more difficult for farmers I can see the result being higher subsidies to compensate rather than the large scale closure of European farms. Which obviously isn't great b…

I am from a country with a not so huge agricultural sector (Slovakia) and think that anything that brings food prices down while not hugely affecting quality will be good. Food in the EU is overpriced relative to the rest of the world. There are reasons for that I can understand but still.

What do you mean by "not so huge agricultural sector (Slovakia)"? I thought Slovakia had a more agrarian economy compared to the more industrialised Czechia.
Post reply on HN