so, the free market fundamentalists claim that supply management leads to higher prices, whereas the farmers that support it claim it leads to lower prices. which is it?

neither. sometimes, it inflates the price; sometimes, it leads to lower prices than the market would imply. what it actually produces is stability.

now, let me tell you - as a poor person on a fixed income, that stability is what i actually want. i know what the price of eggs is, so i can budget for it; i never have to worry that a price spike is going to screw me over for the month. that stability is worth far more to me than the opportunity to get a good deal in march - if it means i'll get fucked in may, as i no doubt will.

it's funny who it is that seems to be concerned about the poor on this issue, isn't it? they're not your usual anti-poverty activists. in fact, they're usually apologists for big businesses - like factory farms.

regardless, it's not like dairy prices are the only factor creating poverty - or even a measurable factor, really. i promise you that i'm not losing $300/year over dairy, but i am getting $375/yr back on gst, and pretty much the only taxable items i buy are doritos and dr. pepper. it's crazy to take it out of context, like that.

so, it is true that supply management shifts the subsidies from government to consumer, but it's not like the government doesn't further compensate on top of it. further, is it not more fair to make the people that consume the product subsidize the industry they're supporting? and, we need to subsidize in order to compete.

it's a broader social issue to keep the farmers at work - and, we're winning because we did the math.

the reality is that america needs to stop blaming other people for constantly failing at math.