From: Zero Powers (zero_powers@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Mar 27 2000 - 13:47:41 MST
>From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
>
>On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Zero Powers wrote:
> > >From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
> > >How would you define "efficient and equitable" distribution of the
>dumped
> > >grain?
> >
> > Efficient and equitable distribution is obviously getting the grain to
>the
> > millions of people who are starving. Granted this is much easier said
>than
> > done. But you'll never convince me that letting it rot and dumping is
>more
> > efficient or more equitable than giving it, or selling it at "cost" to
>those
> > who most need it.
>
>You have a strange and rather arbitrary definition of "efficient" (and
>"equitable" for that matter).
>
>That you will "never be convinced" suggests a position that is not
>rational in its basis. In fact, dumping *is* more efficient and to the
>benefit of *everyone* in the long-term than doing as you suggest. I would
>hardly call forcing a farmer to sell their grain at or below cost to be
>"equitable"; it sounds like theft to me.
I would say that *you* have a strange and rather arbitrary definition of
"theft." I'm no farmer, but I'm sure that as between selling my grain at
cost and just dumping it for nothing, I'd much rather do the former. Sure,
I would *rather* sell it at a profit, but I would *not* consider someone
offering to pay cost for something that I otherwise plan to just destroy, to
be a thief.
-Zero
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
--Thomas Jefferson
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:41 MST