Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ownership in what, the farm or a product produced by the farm?
As I said time and time again, ownership of a share of land for a specified time period.
Quote:
Yes it is. But, we have established several times that the CSA is not renting anything. They are not share croppers; renting a portion of land to farm.
CSA is renting a portion of land for a time. How can you not see that?
Quote:
In the context of this debate, I have no idea of what you are trying to say, unless you are still trying to argue that being a member of the CSA makes you an owner of Farmer Browns farm even if it is for for some limited time, because the article makes it readily apparent that this is not the case.
The only thing that membership in the CSA entitles you to is a percentage of Farmer Brown's produce nothing more, nothing less.
I am simply trying to get you to understand that the CSA is a free market economy. You, for some reason, don't want to admit this fact.
Quote:
The reason why I am unable to understand it is because it does not exist. The only "market" activity is between the CSA and its members, which in turn exchanges a set amount of money to Farmer Brown for his up coming crop. The only thing free about the arrangement is that individuals are free to join the CSA, Farmer Brown is free not to enter into a relationship with the CSA none of which have much to do with "free markets" because there is no activity in which price determination is based upon supply or demand!
Market price setting is the hallmark of a Free Market.
And yet again, CSA is coming to equilibrium price. There is a price the consumers (farmers) pay for the good (a portion of land for one year). That is setting a market price in every sense of the term.
Quote:
As I've stated, the only thing free about this market is the freedom to join the CSA, the freedom of the CSA to enter in an agreement with Farmer Brown and Farmer Brown's freedom to decide whether he wants to participate in the whole scheme or not.
The problem with CSA as an example of free markets is that it acts to distort the market because there are no market pressures. Supply is whatever Farmer Brown produces in a year, but because he has been prepaid for for his produce regardless of its supply or quality. Supply plays no role in price setting so the price is inelastic. Supply can rise of fall yet price stays the same. The same goes for demand, it plays no part in price setting because as a member of the CSA, you get whatever portion of Farmer Brown's produce he brings to the CSA. If the demand for strawberries is higher than the demand for lettuce it doesn't matter, you get what you get.
Price will not be inelastic. On a yearly basis (periods upon which negotiations are made) price for a portion of land will change.
Quote:
This is important because this not only distorts the market for CSA members it distorts the market for produce on the whole. As you should have learned in Econ 100, we assume that the larger the supply, the lower the price. That being the case, in a year of a bumper crop in strawberries Farmer Brown is insulated from price variations because his crops have been purchased at a set price prior to harvest. In this case, Farmer Brown doesn't have to lower the price for his strawberries due to excess supply and because the supply has already been purchased, it reduces the total aggregate supply of strawberries on the open market. Farmer Jones who isn't a participant in the CSA is then also affected as are Farmer Jones' customers. Instead of having to lower his price to compete with Farmer Browns bumper crop of strawberries, he can now raise his price by some marginal amount, since we have to assume that not every citizen of Free Market Valley and beyond are members of the CSA (if they were that would produce a whole other set of distortions). For those buyers of strawberries they will have to spend more for strawberries than they would have if Farmer Brown's strawberries were sold on the open market, and because they spend more on strawberries they spend less on some other commodity, because of the market for strawberries has been distorted.
That is not a free market.
Now who needs to pick up an economics book?
Sorry champ. It is still you who needs the textbook. The product is not strawberries or a the crop itself, the product upon which the market is built is the land the farmer is using. The product is a payout.
You are erroneously mixing payout periods. Farmer Brown in CSA operates on a yearly basis whereas Farmer Jones in Free Market Valley technically operates on an infinite time basis, so to adequately compare Farmer Brown's market and Farmer Jones market you must take Farmer Jones' average price over a yearly period.
Please base your variables upon the same base assumptions and try again champ. Do another google search and maybe it will have the answer!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
I cannot debate with those who cannot read.
As an FYI, personal insults don't help you at all. If you can't hold an intelligent conversation, don't bother to respond.
Quote:
"To join a Community Supported Agriculture program, you buy a share of the farm's produce each season, which entitles you to a weekly box of locally grown vegetables and fruit. "
Let me repeat from the article in question:
"YOU BUY A SHARE OF THE FARM"S PRODUCE!!!!"
Your claim that you are "purchas[ing] a share of land to produce every season, implies that you, yourself, are going to Farmer Brown and working some portion of his land to produce some portion of the total agricultural production of his farm. This is simply not supported by the article as demonstratively pointed out in the above quotation.
You are paying for a portion. The total land and time spent in production is divided amongst the aggregate of consumers in the market. Obviously the good in this market is being produced.
Should I explain manufacturing to you as well? I really hope I don't have to champ.
Would someone else care to explain to hnsq that nowhere in the english speaking world do the following sentence say or mean the same thing because I'm done?
"you buy a share of the farm's produce each season, which entitles you to a weekly box of locally grown vegetables and fruit."
"You purchase a share of land to produce every season."
Would someone else care to explain to hnsq that nowhere in the english speaking world do the following sentence say or mean the same thing because I'm done?
"you buy a share of the farm's produce each season, which entitles you to a weekly box of locally grown vegetables and fruit."
"You purchase a share of land to produce every season."
You are both making more out of this than is needed. As I asked you before.
Is this farm stand closer to free markets (capitalism) whatever term you want to use?
You've never asked me that question although I volunteered to interject my opinion when you ask a more convoluted version of your question to Einsteinsghost.
Anyway...
Quote:
Is this farm stand closer to free markets (capitalism) whatever term you want to use?
Or is it closer to government run socialism?
Sort of like asking, is moon closer than the sun? Yeah the moon is a hell of lot closer but they are both a long, long ways off.
You've never asked me that question although I volunteered to interject my opinion when you ask a more convoluted version of your question to Einsteinsghost.
Anyway...
Sort of like asking, is moon closer than the sun? Yeah the moon is a hell of lot closer but they are both a long, long ways off.
"To join a Community Supported Agriculture program, you buy a share of the farm's produce each season, which entitles you to a weekly box of locally grown vegetables and fruit. "
Let me repeat from the article in question:
"YOU BUY A SHARE OF THE FARM"S PRODUCE!!!!"
Your claim that you are "purchas[ing] a share of land to produce every season, implies that you, yourself, are going to Farmer Brown and working some portion of his land to produce some portion of the total agricultural production of his farm. This is simply not supported by the article as demonstratively pointed out in the above quotation.
To be fair, they, the CSA, have the option of "working the land" for a cheaper price, which includes a set amount of hours to cut cost in your pocket.
I think you may be getting agri-business/corporation and government confused at times when it comes to this issue with the food business/agriculture.
(think "monopoly" and the best money government can buy)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
