Calls for end to food tariffs
http://www.interest.co.nz
Panel 1 with this chart
UN chief Ban Ki Moon
Calls for end to food tariffs
To improve food shortage
Wants output doubled
Criticised biofuels
Panel 2
Greens want Fonterra subsidies
Subsidies are wrong
Make poor hungrier
Genocide by remote control
United Nations chief Ban Ki Moon
Called on rich nations to drop farming subsidies and trade barriers
Crisis summit on world food
World Bank reckons higher food prices will push 100 million people into hunger
Mr Ban reckons dealing with the food crisis could cost US$20 bln
He thinks food supply needs to double by 2030 to solve world hunger
Surprisingly he targeted subsidies and tariffs
EU spends $62 billion a year on CAP
US spends many billions more
Mr Ban also criticized others such as China and Japan who have restricted exports
Japan agreed to re-export 300,000 of exported rice
Mr Ban criticized the shift in land use and food use into biofuels
US plans to use quarter of maize crop for biofuels by 2022
Europe wants to get 10% of auto fuel from crops by 2020
Even in New Zealand, bastion of free trade, the Green Party has asked Fonterra to charge lower prices for milk in NZ than overseas, essentially a subsidy
Lesson is subsidies and tariffs stop rich countries buying food from poor countries
It also raises the price of food globally
Subsidies incentivize the wrong type of production
Subsidies and trade barriers cause starvation and poverty
They need to be dropped
Rich are protecting their farmers
Allowing poor people to starve and keeping prices high for all
European bureaucrats CAP and US food lobbyists and lawmakers are committing by remote control a slow, insidious form of genocide
Duration : 0:2:58
Tags: Analysis, Commentary, Commercial, Documentary, Gotcha!, Grassroots, news, Outreach, Political
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
yeah…. right
yeah…. right
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
Once again – …
Once again – explain where the Government gives any of those companies a direct subsidy?
It’s not argumentative – it’s a question? One that you won’t answer.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
Your demeanour is …
Your demeanour is slowly getting more and more argumentative.
Revealing, your intolerance, rather than your intelligence. ‘
Case in point if I was to look at the final result of ANY thing I could form an opinion to reverse economics, Just like yours
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
The Annual Reports …
The Annual Reports for the three companies that you listed would be a good start.
Why don’t you point out in those where they get a NZ Govt subsidy?
You can’t – can you?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
My challenge is to …
My challenge is to look for your self, if you find something diffrent to where i can see the paper trail, then your claim stands, i’ll shut up, but until then, back up your (so called) intel with some greater understanding Mr. PEAK Oil NZ.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
Are you claiming …
Are you claiming that the NZ Government subsidizes the companaies that you have listed?
If you are – back up your claims with proof or retract your statement.
Those 3 listed companies are not subsidized in any direct way by the NZ Government.
Put up or shut up.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
and yet, Uncle …
and yet, Uncle Helen hands them out like lollie’s, Fonterra, telecom, empower, all listed profit, tell me there not subsidized
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
There was a …
There was a question?
Sloppy grammar and spelling weakens your point.
There is no place for subsidies in a fair and just agricultural policy.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
I wasn’t saying it …
I wasn’t saying it had anything to do with Rockerfellers, but as linuxluver is outlining its back to the esence of the statement. there not intrested in suply and demand, there intrested in redirecting there subsidies back into there own pockets.. And you still havn’t answered my question
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
74 million net …
74 million net individuals added each year.
Nothing to do with the Rockerfellers.
That is a huge amount of extra mouths to feed. Try and watch Al Bartlett’s video about Growth.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
who really …
who really controlls a market, the consumer, the reserve bank.. or the profitier. to quote a well known saying, ‘ i care not for your religion, faith, or belife, if i control their financial stablilty, i can rule the world..’- Rockerfella
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
if the carlile …
if the carlile group left some of that land for the Hesians to grow there food rather than plants for bio fuel. there wouldnt be a problem.. they’ve been able to extract ethonol from sugar cane for years, all of a sudden its not good enough for domestic use.. answer this.. indy cars (yes even scotty dixon) have started performance racing with sugarcane dirived ethonol, why use coco plant or any other substitute. its yeild for grater profit rather than ecological economy based decision..
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
IMF/World Bank ” …
IMF/World Bank “economic medicine” is not the “solution” but in large part the “cause” of famine in developing countries. More IMF-World Bank lending “to boost agriculture” will serve to increase levels of indebtedness and exacerbate rather alleviate poverty.
World Bank “policy based loans” are granted on condition the countries abide by the neoliberal policy agenda which, since the early 1980s, has been conducive to the collapse of local level food agriculture.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
So you think the …
So you think the people in Haiti are just imagining that they’re starving?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
I agree -
I agree -
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
I’m also not …
I’m also not convinced that the highest price anywhere needs to be OUR price. If corn becomes more expensive for barn-sheltered, corn-fed US dairy cows, then why should our milk from grass fed livestock become me expensive? We don’t sell milk to the US. In fact, they have protected their market.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
As population grows …
As population grows, more food needs to be grown. But as population grows, it tends to live on top of land that used to be used to grow food. As concentration of the channels of distributing food grows, the prices to farmers drop even as the profits of those selling the food rises. Farmers cease growing food….even though there is demand there for it,but farmers aren’t getting enough of the money to be able to afford to grow it. This all needs careful looking at.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
i think the food …
i think the food shortage ordeal is as serious as the global warming warning
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
i think the food …
i think the food shortage ordeal is as exagerated as the global warming warning.