Comment by droffel

3 years ago

> What about the crops they destroy because they would be less profitable?

To clarify this point specifically, food self sufficiency is considered a national security issue.

Consider the situation where a hostile country floods your market with cheap food products (below cost) until your country's farms go bankrupt due to an inability to compete. Once you stop producing food of your own, you give significant power to whoever controls your food supply.

This is a large part of why agricultural subsidies exist. And yes, sometimes it means paying farmers to let crops rot on the vine in order to not cause market gluts. That is an entirely different situation from futures and hedging, which in any sane market match supply and demand (with the result of minimizing waste).

"floods your market with cheap food products (below cost)"

The hostile country will eventually go bankrupt because they are producing products below cost.

  • Not necessarily, if they can produce the crops more cheaply. Since each country ideally wants to secure it's own food supply, it's inevitable that many countries will find themselves subsidizing local production that would otherwise disappear in a competitive international market.

    Additionally, hostile countries do not need to flood markets sustainably if the goal is simply to hollow out food production in the target country before taking more overtly hostile (i.e. military) actions.