Edi, I know you chose to ignore my points and resorted to piggy back on
Abdul, which is ok. I however, in the interest of sharing knowledge, want
to share this excerpt culled from Gassama's posting on Networking food
security for poor Gambians:
" B) Export Subsidies
Allows countries to export goods on the world market at prices lower than
those in their domestic markets. Under the agreements, trade-distorting
subsidies are illegitimate. Countries in the North however, provide
facilities to enable their farmers to export their excess produce into our
markets without undue financial stress on them.
The study in the poultry sector is a glaring testimony to this. The study
revealed that the impact of such an action has been enormous in terms of
making domestic production uncompetitive thus sending most producers out of
business, and overall affecting returns to The Gambian economy."
Well, just today, the US is challenging the Soviet Union on matters relating
to the poultry industry. Last year, US farmers made over $600,000,000
selling poultry to the Soviets. Well, the Soviets decided to protect their
budding poultry industry, thus refusing to buy from US farmers under the
guise of a policy against consuming poultry meat injected with penicillin
for faster growth. My question again, how comparative or absolute is this
advantage and who is measuring this advantage? In the above example can we
tell who has the comparative or absolute advantage? Don't you think it's
about time we start thinking out of the box. The battle in this century is
the battle of ideas and it behooves us to think for our selves rather than
saddling David Ricardo's theory which works well for the west to our
disadvantage. We should learn from the mistake of Lobengula, our
Mashonaland fore-father that signed the treaty with the west without knowing
what he signed for, thus he gave away the land to his big surprise. :)!
You do not have to respond if that is your wish but thanks for the healthy
exchange.
Abdul and Yus, as always, you added value to the discourse and Gambia is
better off with all of us putting our ideas together.
>From: Edi Sidibeh <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re-another milestone reach- trade-vs-
>Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:45:56 +0000
>
>Mr Ejie,
>
>Thanks for your kind analysis on this issue, I do not have be an economist
>to make a point on this regard. What i was trying to point out here is the
>fact that our resources are so few to gain us more development assistance
>than the economic assistance from the US. Instead, if Nigeria or other
>African countries with huge amount of natural resources claim to have
>access
>in the US market than the economical assistance that sounds cleaver.
>
>Africa in general has a lot to offer in terms of natural resources. It is
>clear enough that if African's resource are stopped from entering the west,
>their industries will face desaster.
>
>Again you are very right to say that high debts are not good for our
>nation's future if they are not use in right purposes. But the Gambia in
>particular, have only tourism and groundnut cultivation to gain us hard
>currency. Fancy these two important factors to our economy are recently in
>a
>very bad shape. Therefore, the only alternative here is economic assistance
>not a gate way to the US market. once more thanks for your contribution and
>enlightening.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface
>at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edi, I know you chose to ignore my points and resorted to piggy back on
Abdul, which is ok. I however, in the interest of sharing knowledge, want
to share this excerpt culled from Gassama's posting: "The study in the
poultry sector is a glaring testimony to this. The study revealed that the
impact of such an action has been enormous in terms of making domestic
production uncompetitive thus sending most producers out of business, and
overall affecting returns to The Gambian economy." Well, just today, the US
is challenging the Soviet Union on matters relating to the poultry industry.
Last year, US farmers made over $600,000,000 selling poultry to the
Soviets. Well, the Soviets decided to protect their budding poultry
industry, thus refusing to buy from US farmers under the guise of policies
against consuming poultry meat injected with penecellin for faster growth.
My question again, how comparative or absolute is this advantage and who is
measuring this advantage? Don't you think it's about time we start thinking
out of the box. The battle in this century is the battle of ideas and it
behooves us to think for our selves rather than saddling David Ricardo's
theory which works well for the west to our disadvantage. Please take a
look at Gassama's forward of "Food Security For Poor Gambians"
>From: Edi Sidibeh <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re-another milestone reach- trade-vs-
>Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:45:56 +0000
>
>Mr Ejie,
>
>Thanks for your kind analysis on this issue, I do not have be an economist
>to make a point on this regard. What i was trying to point out here is the
>fact that our resources are so few to gain us more development assistance
>than the economic assistance from the US. Instead, if Nigeria or other
>African countries with huge amount of natural resources claim to have
>access
>in the US market than the economical assistance that sounds cleaver.
>
>Africa in general has a lot to offer in terms of natural resources. It is
>clear enough that if African's resource are stopped from entering the west,
>their industries will face desaster.
>
>Again you are very right to say that high debts are not good for our
>nation's future if they are not use in right purposes. But the Gambia in
>particular, have only tourism and groundnut cultivation to gain us hard
>currency. Fancy these two important factors to our economy are recently in
>a
>very bad shape. Therefore, the only alternative here is economic assistance
>not a gate way to the US market. once more thanks for your contribution and
>enlightening.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface
>at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
