Doha round / Wealthy countries should cut farm subsidies

Jump to: navigation, search

"Two weeks ago the administration proposed ending subsidies for 80,000 wealthy farmers, substituting trade-distorting subsidies with cash payments to farmers, and trimming traditional agriculture programs by $4.5 billion over the next decade. These proposals, if approved, would directly benefit some of the poorest people on earth, save lives and ultimately reduce American foreign aid"

From Africa's Last Best Chance, by Richard Holbrooke (The Wall Street Journal, 15 February 2007) (view)

"The big rich countries had a chance to help the poorer nations of the world, but they chose to look after special interests inside their own borders instead. While this may not be so surprising, it makes a mockery of the arguments for free trade which are so often made by these same rich countries when they are trying to get poorer countries to open up their markets and industries."

From Trade is a 2-way street, by Bangkok Post editorial board (Bangkok Post, 20 August 2006) (view)

"Wealthy countries and other major traders have a moral obligation to make concessions to restore the world's faith in the WTO's global trading, which would benefit everyone. There would be no better or nobler way to help the world's poor than to empower them to pull themselves up from poverty and destitution through their own efforts - that is, through fair trade."

From Revive the Doha Round, by The Nation (Thailand) editorial board (The Nation (Thailand), 29 July 2006) (view)

"Obviously, the U.S. government is not the only party at fault here. Europe, too, has been loath to open its cultural and agricultural industries to competition. But we don't need permission from Brussels to reduce our farm subsidies and other trade-distorting policies. Indeed, most Americans would benefit from the change."

From Doomsday for Doha, by Jesse Walker (Reason, 28 July 2006) (view)