[tw]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

You yourself have pointed out many times how there is no such thing as a television made in America anymore.

Clodfobble failed to grasp the statement.

History of America is that every industry competes successfully and routinely when that industry must compete in a free market and when that industry therefore innovates.

I drank coffee one night with a guy from the Labs who installed medium power transistors in RCA production plants after RCA Semiconductors refused to participate. Production made possible the first 'all solid state' television - XL-100. When the Semiconductor group realized their stupidity, they complained to RCA Corporate. Bottom line, the guy ended up suffering the wrath of corporate and was denied a raise that year. So you tell me why TVs are now made overseas where, for example, Akio Morita of Sony was an electrical engineer; not a business school graduate. Just one in a long list of examples for why America lost the television industry.

America was not excluded from the industry by other nations. Companies like Zenith and RCA replaced innovation with cost controls; then ran to government for protection. One legacy of that government protection is inferior technology in American HDTVs. The better technology is used everywhere in the world - but not in America where we implemented a technology to protect Zenith. Only exclusion of
America from the television industry was by American bean counter mentalities that stifled innovation by running to government for protection.

Every one of those examples completely applies also to agriculture. Same problems in other industries demonstrate why American agriculture might be unable to complete. What perverts the productivity of every American industry? Corporate welfare.

Unless you start to examine genetically-modified foods, which have not found much enthusiasm in the markets, there is not a lot of room left for innovation in agriculture.

And then we add facts. Room for and future possible innovation in agriculture is massive. Whereas you somehow have assumed "not ... much enthusiasm in the markets" for genetically-modified foods, the reality is completely different.

The US and Canada grow the bulk of transgenic crops - 60 percent by area cultivated. That is no enthusiasm? Also enthusiastic for transgenic crops and trying to play catchup are Argentina, Brazil, India, and China.

Golden rice is perhaps the best-known transgenic crop developed specifically to meet the needs of undernourished people. Then along came Golden Rice 2 that increased the amount of beta-carotene by about 20 fold. All this being instituted by parts of the agricultural industry less dependent on corporate welfare (many phrases stolen from Scientific American of Sept 2007).

Meanwhile, innovators are researching even better genetic crops that become perennials. Therefore destructive deep till plowing can be eliminated. Another innovation that American farmers should be expected to pioneer. Just another example of why enthusiasm is rabid for genetically modified crops - in direct contradiction to popular spin and myths.

What are the profit increases due to transgenic crops? For cotton: 31% in Agentina. 12% in Mexico. 69% in India. 299% in S Africa. 340% in China. We have hardly begun to innovate in agriculture; in direct contradiction to myths that would also protect agriculture with coprorate welfare.

Then why is it you believe that ending farm subsidies will send all these Mexican agricultural workers back to Mexico, or in any way encourage them to stay there in the first place?

I don't. Again expolating in extremes. One problem is that American (and French) corporate welfare means Mexicans cannot grow those same crops in Mexico. For example, Mexicans are dependent on American corn for tortillas when that corn is best grown in Mexico by Mexicans - who then need not flee to America for jobs. Does that say all corn production would halt in America? Only if expolating in extremes. In reality, that means some production best performed in Mexico moves to Mexico. Labor stays in Mexico to become business owners. More corn is consumed when the undernourished have jobs and can afford many foodstuffs (including crops best grown in the US). Everyone prospers.

Why are crops not being grown where they are needed most, where they are grown best, and where the labor is available? (In part) because American and France so massively subsidized agriculture. So massive is that corporate welfare that the entire world walked out of Cancun three days early. So entrenched is that anti-free market attitude in US and France that the Doha Round will be the first international trade conference to ever fail.

Again, this does not eliminate all 1.8 million illegals. But we are so in denial as to even believe agriculture needs corporate welfare AND that little enthusiasm exists for genetically-modified foods. Same myths that also foolishly claim foreigners stole the television industry. Erroneous beliefs claim innovation is not possible in agriculture and spin myths about illegal immigration; rather than grasp the realities.

Best thing we can do is eliminate agricultural corporate welfare; make possible for Mexicans to competitively grow crops best grown in Mexico instead of the US.