On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:07 PM, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Gar Lipow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It seems overwhelmingly mainstream economic opinion that Japanese rice >> protection is without justification, with huge costs to Japanese >> consumers and no benefits. Is this a case where the mainstream is >> right, or are there legit food securit and social welfare arguments to >> be made for being able to produce a staple locally? It is always >> interesting to look at the poster children for the conventional >> wisdom. > > Isn't there a strong environmental sustainability argument for growing > food locally? In the case of poor countries there is also a strong > argument to be made for food self-sufficiency for national security > and stability. > -raghu. >
Makes sense. I'd be curious to see a rigorous argument for this though. Michael's point is a good one, but I wonder if it is still true today.Japan is a much richer nation than in 1971. I suspect the sustainability, food security and national security arguments are stronger. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
