I had to laugh at this report from Europe.
Brussels must enforce tariffs on imports of cheap Chinese tomato imports to preserve the “dignity” of Italian produce, the boss of tinned food giant Mutti has said.
Francesco Mutti told the Financial Times: “The objective is to give tomatoes their dignity, to take a product that has often been considered a commodity and say: no – tomatoes count.
“We should stop the import of tomato paste from China or add a 60pc tax on it so that its cost will not be so different from Italian.”
There's more at the link.
I see. It's not about "dignity" at all - it's about forcing consumers to pay more for cheaper alternative products, so that Signore Mutti can maintain his share of the market and go on making all that lovely money from his more expensive Italian produce. As for the consumers' desire - for some of them, an imperative need - to save money? They can go to hell. It's all about dignity - Signore Mutti's, that is, not his tomatoes'.
Hypocrisy is the same all over, isn't it?
Peter
African farmers cannot compete with donated, free food.
ReplyDeleteEuropean farmers cannot compete with slave-labor, cheap Chinese food. The answer to both problems is tariffs or outright bans.
Unless you don't want to have home-grown food, and be dependent upon imports? Remember the monopoly business model - lose money on every sale until you establish a monopoly, then set any price you want, because the suckers don't have any alternatives.
Monopolies, like patents, are an act of a legislature, which declares only a certain group may supply a product or service.
DeleteSecondly, the lose-money-then-charge-more-later approach doesn't work like that, because raising prices invites the competition back in.
So it's not a monopoly, and it's not a business model; it's a bogus argument like the original post said.
I've always wondered in these situations why Italians are not outraged that their local prices are so high? Would not a country that takes pride in itself take pride in its ability to produce nutritious food at low costs? Why, then, can Chinese tomatoes be picked and shipped and sold cheaper than Italian tomatoes?
ReplyDeleteI suspect one issue the Italian government would not like to address is how much taxes and regulations add to the cost of Italian tomatoes. Western governments have been punishing farmers rather than helping for the last few decades.
I wonder whether the chinese tomatoes will be labeled as such and whether Italian/EU consumers will care.
ReplyDeleteHere in Japan many consumers are generally hesitant to buy Chicom food due to a number of food poisoning issues as well as out and out fraud WRT stuff like honey turning out to be mostly flavored sugar water.
I suspect that as soon as the first Chicom tomatoes are found to have paste and red food dye much the same will happen in Europe
Higher food prices, or being dependent on importing food from China. Difficult choice. Not.
ReplyDeleteEngland took the free trade cults advice, and now they have basically no farmers, as Jeremy Clarkson has helpfully illustrated. There's nothing hypocritical about preserving your native industries, and preventing your nation from becoming a slave to another nation's exports.
Importing cheaper versions of essential products that your own nation produces is the definition of penny wise, pound foolish. It's why America has less than a tenth the manufacturing capacity it had almost a century ago. But who cares about the future, or future generations, when we can save a few bucks on groceries by screwing over those same generations, amirite?
American farmers and food prices are sustained by handouts from Uncle Sam and the bucks are disguised in many forms. The ethanol push was a disguised boost for corn growers and fit right into the green's agenda. Farmers receiving the various handouts are required to maintain price and to destroy product when directed to do so.
ReplyDeleteI've read that many people in Italy have budgets for tighter than here - costs are higher and salaries are lower; during COVID shutdowns it was a huge issue.
ReplyDeleteThen again, most of the world has higher costs and lower income than the US; as bad as things are here, we can be glad they aren't as bad as elsewhere.
Jonathan
Man, who ever Anonymous is they failed Econ 101. If you block imports you keep production local. From farm to table there are least three levels of income for that sale. A lot of economy exists in the middle layers which is gone if your supplier is foreign. Also if the import cuts prices to increase sales they might be able to do that until the local suppliers are bankrupt. Then they have carte blanche and you could see price increases. I do not call that inflation as that term is used to discribe the money the Government prints to fund the economy. Go back and reread econ 101. It will be enlightening.
ReplyDeletePaul> If you block imports you keep production local.
DeleteTrue, but that's a bad thing. The richest places have the most foreign trade (historical Venice, Hong Kong, New York), while the poorest places have the least foreign trade (behind the former Communist Iron Curtain, North Korea today). Blocking trade reduces choices, and that now-unavailable choice is a loss with no associated gain. If banning trade with people at a distance makes you richer, why do you today buy items from over 1,000 miles away? From over 100 miles? 10 miles? 1 mile? To be the richest you should live on a farm and manufacture everything you need at home, right?
Paul> Also if the import cuts prices to increase sales they might be able to do that until the local suppliers are bankrupt. Then they have carte blanche and you could see price increases.
Selling under cost bleeds money from the largest supplier without costing the competitors, then the subsequent price increases get the former local competitors to reenter the market against the now cash-poor dumper. This strategy is a long-term loser, which is why no business does it.
Well, I opened four cans of tomatoes and one can of tomato paste last night to make sauce. At no time, from opening the cans, through cooking including prolonged simmering, did any of those tomatoes exhibit any signs of "dignity." I must be using the wrong brand. Now those in the ROTEL can do have a quality all their own, but "dignity" is hardly a descriptor.
ReplyDeleteFrom years of Veggietales, I can confirm Bob the San Marzano Tomato is very dignified. Larry the Cucumber, not very much.
ReplyDeleteWith all the product contamination issues with Chinese products I'd support banning them entirely from the country. Food production is the LAST industry that should be moved off shore.
ReplyDeleteI never knowingly buy food products or pharmaceuticals that come from China. I also never buy anything containing Bioengineered Genetically Modified products. By law, if sold in the U.S., if it contains GMOs, it has to say so on the label.
ReplyDeleteChina's produce is often made using human excrement as fertilizer and a variety of chemicals and processes illegal in the Western world (just like other manufacturing processes -- see recent alerts to stop using black cooking utensils due their use of toxic waste plastic in those). Know where your food comes from!
ReplyDeleteI won't dignify this post with a response! 😀
ReplyDeleteAt no point in Chinese food production can the product be trusted. That pretty much also covers ANYTHING that is made there. The problem seems to be a cultural issue, so there is no practical way to address it from outside the country.
ReplyDeleteIt might not be too extreme to state that the Chinese are their own worst enemy.
Isn't this what DJT proposes for Americans with his tariffs? (not that I disagree)
ReplyDeleteThey put melamine in dog and cat food and baby formula because it increased the protein reading making the base with more. No care at all that it killed American’s cats and dogs and babies. Why trust any imported Chinese food stuff, including tomatoes?
ReplyDeleteYo can't talk about free trade if only one side is practicing it. The Chinese DO NOT do free trade. They subsidize the shit outta everything - especially stuff that get's exported because that is how they make money. And it is deliberately aimed at any given foreign market to destroy, in the long run, this markets native production base so they have to be reliant on chines products.
ReplyDeleteThey have been doing that shit for decades now and STILL some people think the tariffs those foreign markets put in place to protect their native production base are the problem.
Sure, the bureaucracy in Italy and the EU is horrendous and the taxes are high - but what is left of local production can still be protected by tariffs. You can reduce bureacracy and lower taxes but when the production base is destroyed everything else goes down with it.
And we're talking about AGRAR. That's a thing that CITY STATES like New York, Venice and Hong Kong could never do so they had to find OTHER ways to get rich. They are not rich because the have no production base - they HAD to get rich because they have no production base.
Or, in other words, what you (tiredWeasel) said. Exactly. But one country "doing" Free Trade, and the other *not* "doing" Free Trade is supposed to be fine, per Milton Friedman. Actually, it's supposed to be bad for the country that's not "doing" Free Trade! Well that was wrong, eh?
Delete> You can't talk about free trade if only one side is practicing it.
ReplyDeleteYes you can, the idea that having more trading choices hurts the free country is another economic myth.
> The Chinese DO NOT do free trade. They subsidize the shit outta everything - especially stuff that get's exported because that is how they make money.
If China wants to sell me power tools for under cost, then great for America! Chinese taxpayers lose money and I gain power tools for cheap. American producers can produce something else in the meantime while Chinese taxpayers bankrupt themselves trading power tools for worthless American Treasury bonds which will never be paid off. American brands moved production outside America because OSHA and EPA and zoning and similar "government says no" raised costs to uncompetitive levels.
> And it is deliberately aimed at any given foreign market to destroy, in the long run, this markets native production base so they have to be reliant on chines products.
If the dumper gains some kind of permanent advantage, then how come industrial production isn't still locked into the first rich cities in the Mediterranean and the Middle East?