economics and agriculture

[badkuk]

i read somewhere that for a country to prosper, it has to move away from an agriculture-based economy first. the only explanation i could think of is that, at least according to adam smith, division of labor is hard to do in agriculture -- which i also don't understand. siguro nung kapanahunan ni smith hindi nga pwede, pero don't we already have tractors, threshers, etc?



pwede po paki explain?

[Flagg]

Konti lang po kasi skills required sa agriculture. Kumbaga sa process of civilization, first industry ito - konti lang value-added. In the States I think mga farm na profitable e mga 10-15 employees lang per 1000 acres (I think). Ergo, konti lang kumikita utilising a very finite and expensive resource (land).

Kung sa factory, multiple required skills, the more skills (and higher expertise) the higher yung kita ng tao. Also, more tao in a much smaller space - much more productive than agriculture. Also, mga products are high value-added. Ergo, mas madami mga kumikita ng mas malaking income - so your entire community, yumayaman din.

Yung ok ngayon e yung mga technology-driven, like call centers. Small capital, large incomes, large requirement for expensive highly skilled labor. Very good! Kasama ng mga OFW, mga call centers ang saviors of the Philippines (as we all know, namamatay na manufacturing dito).

[uls]

Agricultural products are low value products.

Countries become wealthy when they export high value products. a country that exports mangos and coconuts will not make as much money as a country that exports motor vehicles, electronics, industrial machinery etc.

Wealth comes from creation of value. Iron is a raw material of low value. If u turn iron into engines and machinery, value is created.

Industrialization creates high value products from low value raw materials.

Silicon is very abundant in nature. its low value. Turn silicon into transistors and microprocessors and u create value.

[niky]

The problem is, agriculture doesn't produce as much profit for the amount of labor and capital.

That's why US farms are finding it hard to keep laborers, because farm labor doesn't and can't pay as much as industrial labor.

That's also why farms in third-world countries like ours can't compete, because world prices for agricultural products are kept artificially low because both the US and the EU provide such huge subsidies to keep their farms in operation that their prices are hard to compete with.

Of course, without a proper and modern agricultural system, we're more dependent on imports, which is bad for us. With both a developed agricultural and industrial sector, we can generate more jobs and lower our reliance on imports. The problem is to convince the government of that.

[4wrider]

Our country is still heavily reliant on the agricultural sector. The sector still provides significant employment which in turn provides the purchasing power which the other sectors like services, manufacturing etc need. Kung mababa ang income ng farmers natin, konti lang bibilihin nilang service and manufactured goods.

Also, with less opportunities to earn marami sa rural poor natin eh nagpipilit sa mga siyudad.

Pero ano na ba ginagawa ng gobyerno. Yung land reforms natin puro palpak. Pinababa lang ang productivity ng mga farms natin dahil nawalan economy of scales. Sino na ngayon sa maliliit na farms ang pwedeng bumili ng mga combines para maging more efficient ang farming.

[altec]

among those countries into agriculture, talagang 3rd world ang agricultural output ng pilipinas. From rice, sugar, corn, even cassava! Our yield per hectare is no where near those of other countries. These yields bring down their cost per hectare, plus bigger volumes, mean they can (or are forced to) sell it at a lower price, thus agriculture output in its raw form will never allow let a country heavily relying on it to progress like an industrial/commercial based country.

Pero teka nga, ang pilipinas ba ay agricultural based country or ofw/ocw based country na? Parang ofw remittances na parati ang nababasa ko that affects our forex more than our agricultural output, kasi halos lahat na ng tinatanim natin na agricultural product, ay net importer na tayo, meaning we are forced to import to satisfy our need for that product, plus its cheaper to import than to produce it domestically. At least sa pinoy, "net exporter" pa tayo ng ofw!!

[badkuk]

hmmm, didn't know us/canada/euro agri products were subsidized, parang china garments pala

pero mahirap din if you totally move out of agriculture; siguro naman develope it up to the point where you're at least self sufficient. mahirap din ung puro import lang

nabasa ko rin sa news column dati that some people are worried that china is converting agri lands for industrial use; baka time will come that they may not be able to export rice, or even feed itself. pag umabot kasi sa point na yan, di kaya maging profitable na ang mag agri?

[sirkosero]

actually, a country may prosper kahit na agriculturally dependent. thats what you call comparative advantage. kung pinaka efficient pa din na use of land is farming at pinilit maging industrial based, hindi din maganda ang effect. in some cases, lalo pa nagiging backward.

[van_wilder]

to simplify things... its all about allocation of resources/capital/asset... for examply luxembourg... if agriculture sila, do you think would they still have the highest gdp per capita?

[Flagg]

Re Luxembourg: Ehehe money launderer sila. The highest tech industry of all.

Re US/EU subsidies: Proof na talagang low earning ang agriculture. But a first step is still a first step, it has to be made to go forward (meaning self-sufficiency in agriculture first). Kaya nga protektado nila, while tayo di maka-bangon-bangon kc first step palang natin e palpak na. Sobra nga nakakahiya, IRRI is based here producing the high-yield strains benefiting other countries, but somehow, we can't seem to make use of them.