Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

ZERO soybean imports

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by 96Gatorcise, Dec 24, 2018.

  1. ursidman

    ursidman GC Hall of Fame

    4,688
    1,715
    533
    Sep 27, 2007
    Assuming that is correct, can Brazil not just grow more? Just clear a bunch more of the Amazon. Or is the gap really big - double or triple the current production?
     
  2. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    65,161
    10,440
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    That might just be the tragedy in all this... deforestation of the Amazon Rain-forest is a global CRIME!
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  3. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    24,868
    2,021
    1,093
    Apr 8, 2007
    Gainesville, FL
    As long as an individual one gets his way, it's all good. By any means necessary.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    They just elected their Trump to help that process along, as will our Trump with his policies.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    65,161
    10,440
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    Because the last president they had was in cahoots with Obama/Soros in some oil-deal scam and got forced out of office... I too digress.

    But, in all seriousness. We cannot be at the mercy of China when they decide not to buy our crops. The solution is to grow crops that we can sell to other nations.
     
  6. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Please explain what exactly it is that you think Obama and Soros did that constituted an "oil-deal scam."
     
  7. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    65,161
    10,440
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    No, you go fist Why is growing other crops a bad idea? And why should we let China hold our farmers hostage over trade deals? Especially since we know damn well that they are STEELING FROM US AND ROBING US BLIND in the process? Do you not want our president to FIX that? Tell us what you think Trump should do?

    Go ahead and give us your answer to the China problem.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
  8. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    I have to answer your questions first, despite asking you first? Okay, sure. Make sure you answer my question afterwards though...

    Growing other crops is a bad idea because it will lower the price of other products due to the increased supply/competition. Meanwhile, American farmers will get locked out of markets that are more profitable.

    Our farmers weren't hostage. They voluntarily sold their product for the highest price they could receive.

    No, I don't think we need a President to fix the problem of being able to sell our products for more money. Trump should let free markets develop. If some company feels that the risk is too high to produce in China, they will go produce elsewhere. If they are willing to share technology or produce in China, that is their choice. It is their technology, not your (or "our") technology. What they do with it, short of certain illegal activities, is their choice. If they choose to risk their technology, that is their business.
     
  9. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    65,161
    10,440
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    All trade, including farming is regulated by our government and is part of trade deals that we make with foreign governments. IOW, the farmers are NOT free agents.
     
  10. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    You still didn't answer my question after I gave you the courtesy of answering your questions asked after my question.

    And that is typically how fascists view trade, but I don't think the point of trade is to enrich or advance the interests of the state. They need to abide by the rules of the state, but free markets typically have limited rules on the exchange of goods or services.
     
  11. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    65,161
    10,440
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    What rules? Are they broken? What do you even mean? All countries have regulations and rules therein. I have no idea how you think "free-markets" are supposed to work, but the "free" in free-markets does NOT mean what you think it means.
     
  12. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    You still haven't answered my question. I am beginning to question whether you are ever going to do so at this point. Disappointing since I gave you the benefit of the doubt in answering your questions.

    Regardless, I am unsure of the confusion point here. Firms have to abide by rules designed by governments to govern economic activity, including trade, labor conditions, product design, taxes, etc. But a free market is one in which the goal of trade is to enrich those engaged in trade, both the firms engaged in the activity and the customers that receive their preferred goods or services. When the goal of trade becomes the enrichment of the state, that is mercantilism or fascism.
     
  13. fastsix

    fastsix Premium Member

    8,348
    980
    1,243
    Apr 11, 2007
    Seattle
    You're dreaming if you think the world can't pick up the slack. If China needs soybeans and is willing to pay money for them, somebody will grow them if the USA won't.
     
  14. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    6,379
    491
    538
    Apr 8, 2007
    Yeah ... For all the cons on this board talk about capitalism and how great it is, they sure dont seem to understand it.

    Tarriffs are a restriction on capitolism.

    The farmers were growing soybeans because they did the math and determined it was the highest production crop they can grow with the best profits. Growing anything else means they make less money. The con solution here is basically " just get used to making less money"... "Who cares if you leveraged the farm land to buy equipment suited for soybean production"

    Likewise, China is looking elsewhere because they can now find it cheaper than what we produce. Again, capitolism. China doesn't owe us squat. Neither does Brazil. These are delicate markets and haphazardly throwing a monkey wrench into the system over the advise of your experts ... Well ... This is what you get.
     
  15. rpmGator

    rpmGator GC Hall of Fame

    13,024
    517
    648
    Apr 10, 2007
    Temporary pain produces the baby

    Take American soy off the market and supplies run out fast which China is now discovering

    We grow the most followed by Brazil and the others combined equal about another third

    Taking a third out of play won’t feed their livestock and there wasn’t an huge over supply to start with

    China banning a third of the world supplies isn’t working out well
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2019
  16. danmann65

    danmann65 GC Hall of Fame

    1,482
    321
    303
    May 22, 2015
    Trying to rectify past bad trade deals is not going to happen without some pain. American labor was sold out by both parties.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. ursidman

    ursidman GC Hall of Fame

    4,688
    1,715
    533
    Sep 27, 2007
    Is it legal for Brazil or other country to plant more to meet the demand?
     
  18. gatorpa

    gatorpa GC Hall of Fame

    6,076
    66
    123
    Sep 5, 2010
    East Coast of FL
    I guess I'm not the average person... I don't spend more or less based on what's in my 401k because I can't easily get at that money, so its like its not even there.

    But then again in 05-06 I didn't run out and buy a house based on what some a-hole lender said I could afford. I bought one based on what I knew I wanted to afford.
    Good on me because I was able to buy a foreclosure at the bottom of the market and double my money in 6 years when few people could get financed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,940
    707
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    • Winner Winner x 1