W.T.O. Rules Against U.S. Cotton Subsidies

[UpInArms]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/19/business/worldbusiness/19trade.html

(free registration or try www.bugmenot.com)

SÃO PAULO, Brazil, June 18 - In a landmark decision, the World Trade Organization ruled against American cotton subsidies in a case brought by Brazil, officials from the two countries said on Friday.

The decision could eventually lead the United States to reduce subsidies for its entire farm sector and encourage other countries to challenge such aid in wealthy nations, analysts said.

The W.T.O. report, which was not made public, upheld a preliminary ruling in April that supported Brazil's claim that the more than $3 billion in subsidies the United States pays its cotton farmers distorts global prices and violates international trade rules.

"We are very satisfied with the panel's decision," Roberto Azevedo, who heads the trade disputes department at Brazil's foreign ministry, said in a phone interview from Brasília. "Once this is all over with, we expect the United States to comply with the ruling."

In Washington, Bush administration officials criticized the decision, arguing that the best way to address distortions in world agriculture trade was through negotiations, not litigation. The officials also said the United States would appeal, a process that could drag on for months, and possibly more than a year.

...more...

[NuttyFluffers]

1. Oooh!!!!! Fascinating news!!!!

Mwa ha ha ha! Now I must accelerate my plans to start my own import/export business! Mwa ha ha ha! Opportunity!!!!

[WildClarySage]

2. It's funny that they say negotiation not litigation is the key

and they are appealing the decision.

[Spazito]

3. Typical double-speak...

They did the same thing when they lost in the softwood lumber dispute and were told to reduce their tariffs. As usual, they say one thing and DO the opposite.

[kodi]

4. put this in perspective: thousands of americans will lose their jobs now

but i hear wal-mart is hiring.

[Tansy_Gold]

5. A few thousand, maybe, wealthy cotton farmers

Many of the textile mills have been gone for years; it's almost impossible to buy "Made in the USA" cotton fabric any more.

But much of the cotton that's grown here is obscenely wasteful in terms of water usage, it uses enormous amounts of chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides, and it employs very few people. Cotton farming was mechanized many years ago.

So fewer $250,000 cotton picking combines will be sold each year, a few John Deere or New Holland salesmen will take home slightly smaller commissions. Caterpillar will make a few fewer land planes.

But $3 billion in crop subsidies MIGHT make their way into the pockets of workers, instead of into the pockets of very, very, very wealthy cotton farmers. Maybe there'll be more money for college education for first-generation college students or low-interest home mortgage loans so farm workers can afford to own their homes instead of renting from the patrón.

Several years ago, when subsidies were given to the Arizona cotton farms NOT to grow more cotton, because of the gigantic surplus, not one penny trickled down (and those were in the days of Ronnie "The Trickler" Raygun) to the laid-off farm laborers. The farm owners took extra vacations to Switzerland or bought a new half-dozen Cadillacs for their kids. Maybe now that the subsidies might be cut off entirely, things might actually change.

Of course, Tansy Gold ain't holdin' her breath.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Terry_M]

6. I believe Cotton is so subsidized here that

African countries can't compete with American cotton even after transportation costs.