A lesson in government hypocrisy — as if one were needed these days — is to be found in the agricultural policies of the rich nations of the world, including the United States.
The U.S. government incessantly proclaims its desire to help the world’s poor. Empty words. Sure, the politicians force the suffering American taxpayers to provide foreign aid to the developing countries’ governments. But what’s good for a government is usually not good for those who live under it. Meanwhile, the people of those nations are held down by a constellation of U.S. (and European) tariffs and quotas that stifle their ability to improve their own conditions.
Once again government thwarts social cooperation, which is the essence of the division of labor and economic exchange. American consumers would love to buy low-priced clothing, shoes, and agricultural products from abroad. Producers in the developing world would love to sell them those things. But these exchanges never come to fruition. Why? Because the U.S. government forbids it. And why does it do that? Because domestic producers and farmers have the political pull. Thus, tariffs raise the price of low-cost foreign products so that they are less attractive to Americans than domestic alternatives. And import quotas suppress supply, forcing Americans to pay more for fewer goods.
This is a double abomination. It makes a mockery of all those pledges to help lift the world’s poor out of poverty. U.S. policy consists of throwing a few crumbs (forced from the taxpayers) while stifling self-help through economic enterprise. Moreover, it exposes the hypocrisy of all those politicians who say they want to end poverty at home. If they really wanted to do that, they would work to sweep away the laws that artificially raise the price of clothing and food. If people in America had access to foreign-made products at free-market prices, they’d find it much easier to care for their children. So why don’t we hear our misleaders calling for free trade — for the children? The answer is simple: they don’t want to lose the votes of certain businessmen, unions, or farmers.
Because protectionism is rampant in the West, we should applaud China, India, Brazil, and the rest of the “Group of 21” for demanding that the industrialized world drop its trade restrictions on agricultural products and eliminate farm subsidies. The subsidies encourage Western farmers to overproduce and to dump their surpluses in the developing world, throttling local producers. The Group of 21 threatened to oppose new trade agreements during the recent meeting of the World Trade Organization in Cancun, Mexico, unless their demands were met.
As the Los Angeles Times put it, “The announcement amounts to a bold challenge to the hegemony of the United States and European Union in setting the world’s trade rules and agenda.” But observers are expecting the United States and European Union to put the screws to the developing nations in order to keep them from upsetting the meeting. One way to do that would be to threaten even higher tariffs and lower quotas.
If this doesn’t show the malevolence of the Western governments, what would? The farmers in the developing world simply want to sell their products to willing buyers. But because of the political connections of wealthy farmers in the United States and Europe, they are forbidden to do so.
The Washington Post offers a poignant example from Brazil. Because of the pull of the American sugar growers, the U.S. government imposes quotas on sugar from Latin America, with a 244 percent tariff on any excess. Brazil could produce twice as much sugar if Americans were free to buy it. Because of the protectionist wall, poor Brazilians who would be working in the sugar industry today can’t find jobs. And Americans have to pay far more than the world price for sugar. This is indecent.
Globalization is under attack from a motley crew of socialists and phony anarchists (who want governments to stifle trade). A defense of true globalization — unfettered free trade — cannot be made by hypocritical protectionist governments beholden to special interests. Free traders of the world unite. We have nothing to lose but our chains.