農產品開放進口

蘇少儀

這一篇報告道盡了美國促進全球貿易自由化，開放農產品自由進口後，美國農業及農民的困境（2002年就已非常明朗；農民及農業金融體系已無法負荷）
臺灣行政及立法部門擬定的政策尤其是農業政策切勿隨著美國的音樂起舞或跟著美國以往的腳步走，各有各的國情（大學的基本訓練：獨立思考）
行政院須以國家安定及永續為目標制定農業政策而不是以佔GDP比重制定政策，讓弱勢有自立更生的路可走而不是凡事靠救濟措施...................


.......................美國農業政策的根本轉變，將減輕全球各(已)開發(中)國家農民的壓力..........................
http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/ra03/rethinking.html

The Exportation of Poverty
Finally, U.S. pressure to open new markets resulted in the removal of tariffs and quotas protecting price levels in fragile agricultural sectors throughout the developing world. Dumping of U.S. products increased along with a chorus of voices claiming unfair trade practices. A recent (2003) paper from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy estimates that dumping levels, or the extent to which the export price is below the actual cost of production, are astounding: 25 to 30 percent for corn, 40 percent for wheat and an unconscionable 57 percent for cotton. (2)
Less understood is the complex relationship between subsidies and prices. Subsidies are U.S. government payments made directly to producers. Most critics of these payments, which nearly tripled since the key turning point of 1996, point to their role in increasing production, thereby glutting the market and forcing prices lower. Instead, this study provides evidence to show that the relationship is far from a linear one, with the reality far more complex than many would have us believe. U.S. production of the eight major crops (3) increased as land previously idled by government set-aside programs was brought back on-line. In the absence of traditional supply management and price support tools, prices declined sharply. Faced with drastic impacts on net farm income, the U.S. government responded by paying farmers compensatory sums to help close the gap. These payments began as so-called “emergency payments,” in response to the first market shock in the late 1990s. By 2002, it had become clear that farmers and the rural banking sector would not be able to survive on incomes derived solely from the market. Direct payments decoupled from planting and production decisions were reinstated. Additional direct payments are automatically triggered as prices decline, so that subsidies are both fixed and automatic. If this practice does not change, one can expect U.S. government outlays for farm programs over the next ten years (2003 to 2012) to exceed $247 billion. (4)
...............................................................................................
A Farmer-Oriented Agricultural Policy
This illustrative policy blueprint is described as “farmer-oriented,” because fair prices from the marketplace would contribute less to concentration and consolidation of corporate control over the farm-to-consumer chain. Net farm income for the U.S. agricultural sector as a whole would be approximately the same as under the scenario of continued present policies, yet independent diversified family farmers would once again have every reason to believe they could continue in farming, preserving their rightful role in the production of our food. Family farmers would have more hope for better incomes than under the often-unfair subsidy based system.
U.S. government outlays could drop by more than $10 billion per year, certainly good news for taxpayers. And most importantly, perhaps, it would discourage dumping U.S. products into vulnerable developing countries. Higher prices would be transmitted to the world market, helping to restore the prosperity for rural economies on which national economic development relies.
..............................................................................................

gtc

美國農業政策的根本轉變，將減輕全球各(已)開發(中)國家農民的壓力..........................


全球最具 "國際戰略"的 ....  美國農業 ?!
..................
對" 臺灣 " 來看 新的"美援" 將開始 ?!.................USMG- AIT ?