Fórum EMB de Discussões
[  EMB's Main Menu  |  Forum Index  |  Cadastro  |  Search  ]
   
ENGLISH
PORTUGUESE
 LINGUISTICS & CULTURE


Autor:  Alexandre
E-mail:  não-disponível
Data:  03/FEV/2005 7:22 PM
Assunto:  Re: To :Alexandre
 
Mensagem:  Hi Johannes, Thank you for the link. I just finished listening to an interview with Franz Fischler, the European Union's Agriculture Commissioner at the World Trade Organisation http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/hardtalk/3536129.stm Here is a quote from him M.R Fischler "We reduced really drastically our export subsidies. We went down from 25% to 9% and we will reduce it further. We offered the possibility that we are prepared to phase out altogether export subsidies for those products which are the interest of developing countries." He is saying that they reduced the amount of EXPORT subsidies ( not subsidies in general) from 25% to 9% of their TOTAL BUDGET. I don´t think this means anything. The real question is if these subsidies as distorting trade regardless of the reduction. Further on Mr Fischler goes on to say that a new system must be established where "poor" countries will be benefited. He says that " competitive" countries like Brazil and Australia should not be allowed to get the share of the market that their competitiveness would allow them. Basically the european union wants to judge on who should benefit regardless of who is better. This is a disaster not to mesntion that a closer look at such " lovely intentions" reveal that regardless of how competitive you are WE ( the european union) will decide who the market share goes to according to our views and our interests. This is bogus. I think there should be no subsidies and if the consumer wants to benefit a certain country or region he should pay the price for their products according to market value and the government should not make all the consumers pay a certain price to benefit the country or region that THEY selected. In other words Brazil who would be able to stretch its competitive muscle is not allowed to do so because african countries are in worse conditions than brazil. Lets look at this from a diferent angle. Brazil is in a worse condition than europe and the united states so lets give preferential treatment to brazilian airplane manufacturer embraer over canadina bombardier and Airbus and Boeing when it comes to aircraft purchases. This would be unaceptable to both americans and eurpeans but the eurpeans think it is their right to make the same decision concerning agricultural goods. I think this will drag down for a long time because the tipping point towards a rational agreement were the americans and they decided to increase their subsidies instead of taking the traditional free market path that most republican administrations have taken during history. By the way, remeber that shrimp fallacy link i sent a few months ago. It was under judgement back then but now the american shrimp farmers have won and brazilian shrimp will suffer a larger tarrif. It is incredible.


Envie uma resposta
Índice de mensagens


 English Made in Brazil -- English, Portuguese, & contrastive linguistics
To :Alexandre  –  Johannes  03/FEV/2005, 12:46 PM
 Re: To :Alexandre  –  Alexandre  03/FEV/2005, 7:22 PM

Contents of this forum are copy-free.
By S&K