Now you want to debate the issue, rather than the politics? I think your
earlier post showed no respect for the core issue at all, only a cynical
interest in which party is winning votes in Congress, so it's pretty
difficult to imagine that suddenly you want to talk about the merits of food
subsidies.
I don't have a lot of knowledge about agricultural subsidies, but I
certainly know that ensuring a stable food supply is a subject worthy of
serious attention, rather than pure politics. I'd be a lot more interested
in learning more about the influence of huge agri-business companies such as
ADM than the superficial coverage of this issue in mass media.
Nick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:40 AM
> To: Brin-L
> Subject: Fwd: RE: No Money In the Cupboards
>
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >we don't need the Washington Post re-interpreted to be
> >even more cynical than it already is, especially when the issue as is
> >critical to our lives as the food supply.
>
> Can you provide any evidence that this nation's food supply is in
> such danger as to require significant additional spending, beyond
> that proposed by the Republicans?
[etc.]
