economics and agriculture

[Altis6453]

Ah,agricultural vs. Industrial economies, the age old debate.

You guys all have a point. Just a point of view here, i'd rather we had a well-developed agricultural-based economy simply because it makes use of what we already have in abundance ... land (though not all of it is suitable for produce), water and labor. At least, you can be secure in the knowledge that the people in your country will not go hungry. Pres. Marcos and Pres. Aquino tried to make it work with their land reform programs...but there was a hitch. When the government tried to buy land from the landowners, they sold at a high price. Plus, when the land tenants were finally given an interest in the land in the concept of an owner, they just as quickly sold them and wasted the money on sabong and inom. The land they tilled became smaller and thus the tractors they used were no longer efficient to maintain.

Apparently, there was no follow-through program to see to it that the land tenants themselves become self-sufficient. Hay, if only.

[4wrider]

Yung mga farmer beneficiaries ng land reform, marami sa kanilan noong nagkalupa pina trabaho sa iba o kaya pinaupa kundi man binenta agad pagkatapos ng prohibition period. Bumili ang marami ng TV, Ref at iba pang appliances o di kaya ng jeep at namasada na lang. Marami sa mga lupa ay di na naalagan ng mabuti. Kulang na ang mga panggastos sa tamang binhi at pataba. Kalaunlaunan ay nasira ang mga appliances at ang jeepney ay panay na ang sira. Kaya ngayon marami sa kanila balik sa marginal farming o namamasukan na lamang. Masama pa marami sa kanilang mga anak ay nakipagsapalaran dito sa Kamaynilaan. Masuwerte na ang iba na nakakuha ng trabaho bilang OFWs.

Of course, may ilan din namang success stories, pero iilan lang ito.

[artpogi]

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?

I didn't read the other posts, but my interpretation of the statement is that a country should lessen it's dependence on agriculture-generated income.

If that's what the statement means, then I totally agree. IMO a country whose income is mostly generated from agricultural exports/products will have a hardtime catching up with 1st world countries in terms of beefing up it's foreign reserves. One good example is Japan after the second world war.

[uls]

Yep... i cant think of a country that got rich from agricultural exports.

[trotsky]

i think agriculture can be made profitable only if we meet two conditions: one is to focus on high-value crops and two: access essential markets through intelligent trade negotiations. but as we all know the first world has meshes of trade barriers that cannot be easily penetrated. add to that the subsidies which they will never do away with. wto is essentially worthless as the rich countries control leverage in it.

but there is a problem here. most of our farmers are subsistence growers. you cannot say to them, grow this high-value crop and do away with rice because they cannot survive without rice (like most of us).

for me the i'm for a post-industrial economy. we must all reinvent ourselves for it.

[badkuk]

Wow pre, talagang economics terms na gamit mo ha?

...para kunwari me alam :D

[Flagg]

Heres an example of how bad our agri system is:

Someone loaned some money from our family and his biz crashed in 1997. Since wala na sya pambayad, to keep us from throwing him into jail, he gave us some large hectarages in a Luzon province. Ano magawa namin, we won't make money off his being in jail, e di we accepted it.

Now, while looking for a buyer, that land is idle. Why? Because if anyone plants anything there, he can claim to be the ages old tenant and then grab it through CARP. Parang legal robbery. I would love to have someone plant something there para lang hindi sayang. Kahit wala na kaming share sa harvest, as long as parang caretaker sya. But no can be, everyone is interested in the LAND... so useless it stays. Of course, anyone who dares to squat on it and plant will be evicted. Sad no?

[Flagg]

Ehehe para hindi OT, industrial is better than agricultural. But, to have a good industrial economy, your stepping stone (agricultural) has to be fixed up first.

[wildthing]

Naaliw ako sa concepts and opinions ng post...considering that most are probably not even working on the agricultural sector (o mali ba ako?!?)

I am an agriculturist...technically a graduate of BS in Agriculture...I specialize in animals (nutrition in particular)...but I am more into trading sa ganitong sector....to enlighten the first poster of this thread...I regret to tell you that IMO that opionion you got is half-true...

Unless you are really in my sector you'll never know that there is really money, work and good sustainability in the agricultural sector...I could not explain it too much in detail how kasi it is part of a very complicated system.

Anyway, this issue is really some sort of which comes first, the chicken or the egg thing....industrial ba o agricultural ba????

The only thing I can say is that FOOD is still a basic human needs...so the agricultural sector must stay!

Peace!

[Flagg]

The only thing I can say is that FOOD is still a basic human needs...so the agricultural sector must stay!

Peace!

Of course it has to stay. Kaya first stepping stone to full economic potential.

But, about the big money, of course it can be made... kaya nga sa mga teleserye natin e puro hacienda in the province ang biz ng mga evil rich oppressors. Pero iilan lang yun? When agriculture becomes a high-profit enterprise, konti lang talaga makikinabang. Like sa US, the majority of the United AutoWorkers, I'm sure, are US citizens (current troubles of the UAW notwithstanding) while a lot of the labor in farms is left to the non-citizenry (derogatorically called 'wetbacks')... Meaning... poor wages for hard work.

[RedHorse]

malaki din ang inputs sa agri.. di lang basta basta.. pero just like in any biz, pag ginawa ng tama... malaki din ang return

[badkuk]

Naaliw ako sa concepts and opinions ng post...considering that most are probably not even working on the agricultural sector (o mali ba ako?!?)

nah, IT professional po...and getting a little sick of it quite frankly B)

I am an agriculturist...technically a graduate of BS in Agriculture...I specialize in animals (nutrition in particular)...but I am more into trading sa ganitong sector....to enlighten the first poster of this thread...I regret to tell you that IMO that opionion you got is half-true...

at this point i'm not really completely sold on the concept; just trying to get inputs which are quite enlightening actually

actually me nabasa lang ako sa "Wealth of Nations" ni Adam Smith. i just
found it a bit strange since it was written in 1776(?) -- which i think doesn't quite fall into the industrial age, pero here's Adam Smith talking about moving away from agriculture. isip ko tuloy, kung lahat nga naniwala ke Smith, to the point that no one's doing agri anymore...ano ung kakainin natin?

sa loob loob ko lang, simple case of supply and demand. time comes when there isn't enough food to go around, baka ultimong kamote e tataas din ang presyo. in a way feeling ko Smith sorta overlooked this possibility(naku, baka multuhin ako nun!)

sa ngayon lang nga, ang nangyayari kasi ngayon sa agri(at least sa 1st world countries), sobrang efficient ng supply, yet demand really isn't growing that much. kaya pa subsidy subsidy, pa dump dump sa ibang countries, etc. kaya nga siguro pinush ung GATT/free trade e no?

[Flagg]

Yup sir badkuk. Kaya dapat strong agri muna, then push for industrialization. or do both, kung kaya ng gov't. (Di kaya ng atin e, dito it's strong gov't first... )

[wildthing]

Yup...it has to be both...the agri sector will feed your own people who would be doing industrial work,hehehe....

...mahabahaba itong inuman....:toma:

[trotsky]

Yup...it has to be both...the agri sector will feed your own people who would be doing industrial work,hehehe....

...mahabahaba itong inuman....:toma:

add to that of course the knowledge/service sector..... heck, i believe it could even supplant a mass industrial base as long as it is done properly.

also food security is essential. ayoko na me nagugutom na tao at may ibang yumayaman, hindi maganda.

at least dito kalmado tao. sa ibang thread mainit masyado!

[wildthing]

the truth about the 1st world being entirely "efficient" in their agricultural sector is not really true to all...sa Pinas our cost to produce pork is one of the highest but the pork you are buying from the super market is one of the cheapest around the world...

the only reason one would say that the imported pork is cheap...it's probably because of one of these reasons:
1) smuggled - no tax and no proper quality assurance kung ito ba ay safe meat (most of the time eto yung matagal na sa freezer nila and deemed unfit for human).
2) meat they are "exporting" to third world countries like us is NOT the prime cut ones, these are technically what they call - 2nd class meat ....example the Chicken leg quarters in the US is not a prime cut meat, it is the breast part which is the prime cut meat about US$ 3-4/kg dati and the leg quarters are US$ 0.5-1/kg ang selling price. Americans are health conscious and seldom eat the leg quarters...sa pinoy eto ang mas masarap!
3) Government subsidies sa "export" market...most 1st world countries encourages export busines and gives a lot of subsidies and tax excemptions to exporters...so they can bring down their cost.

just to info....

[ebc16420]

Reading all posts & input of the subject makes me wonder how difficult it is for agriculture to survive, but having personally seen the agri program in Egypt, China, & Taiwan erase all doubts that it can be a profitable one. The only reason i see that phil. fail in agriculture is the Goverment anemic support (financial and technology) and rampant corroption in the system. Just imagine had J-J Bulante use the money properly and effectively in agriculture or perphaps, the pork barrel of tongresman & senatong poured into agriculture program.

In Egypt, the goverment give substantial financial support equivalent to 50% of farmers investment and tax free for 5 yrs. while irrigation system is under the goverment responsibility with a minimal fee to the farmers, almost free.
My personal view, is that the goverment has to fully support and provide technical knowledge to our farmers, particularly irrigation system and seedling propagation.
Marketing agri produce likewise has to be upgraded to met exportation standard which again need the support of the goverment, to raise the value of the product.
In summary, it is sad to say that the Philippines in general has pooled talent & effort into politics sarsuela resulting into uncurable corraption. However, I believed pilipino people are agriculture base and will remain to be.

[empy]

agriculture gets a bad rap because it's usually an inefficient way to create wealth. the best way to explain this is through an illustration - if you had 5 hectares of land and 100 workers, would you make more money planting camote or building an auto factory?

however, some people don't have a choice but plant camote - for example, people in countries without access to capital and technology. these countries are typically heavily agricultural because of this, and the inefficiencies have poor GDP per capita. only as the countries accumulate wealth and knowledge and start to industrialize that they start utilizing their resources more effectively and becoming an economic force. China in the past 10 years is an excellent example of this taking place, although one might argue that they still have a long way to go.

it's absolutely true that countries need a strong agricultural sector - but ironically, the strongest agricultural sectors are highly industrialized. instead of using people and tools, the agriculture industry in countries like the US have processes and infrastructure that look more like an assembly line.

[Flagg]

Sir wild thing, how right you are.

Sir ebc, agree! Only, we aren't talking of agri surviving but instead we are talking about how much more people benefit with an industrial economy instead of an agricultural one. I'm pretty sure the countries you mentioned have also have agricultural super-specializations: Egyptian cotton (ahhhh), Chinese tomatos, Taiwanese umm, dunno.

Sir M54, as usual, bow ako sayo.

Kahit mga countries with super-value crops poor pa rin... for an extreme example: coca leaf & poppy... the wealth is still concentrated in the hands of a few like Khun Sa, Pablo Escobar, etc.

[trotsky]

Kahit mga countries with super-value crops poor pa rin... for an extreme example: coca leaf & poppy... the wealth is still concentrated in the hands of a few like Khun Sa, Pablo Escobar, etc.

it's a pity our super-value marijuana just gets burned while still growing! we could make this an export crop to holland!