Free Trade 2

[wd40]

I saw an old producer poll on Free Trade this week. I really would like to know if the consensus on Free Trade is still the same. There are quite few who watch this blog site and don't comment.
So I'm wondering if youall would just give a simple "Yes" or "No" reply to

"Do you think Free Trade has been good for agriculture”?

Thanks - if there is a big enough response I will pas it along to some who need to know.

[per]

no.... it would not take a simple no so I am writing a few words.

[grassfarmer]

No - It has been a disaster for primary producers. For the same reason as per I must expand ;o)
"Free Trade" is a misnomer - it could more accurately be termed something like "enslaved trade".
What do you mean by "agriculture" anyway? It has been very, very good for processors, suppliers and retailers of agricultural products but terrible for primary producers.

[kato]

Here's NO number three to add to that.

[wmoebis]

As grassfarmer says; It has been good for agriculture as an industry, however the Gov'ts see producers as a supplier to the industry and it has been so good to the suppliers.

Not unlike the auto industry, bailout was good for industry but not so much for the suppliers as many are now shut down.

I vote NO as a producer.

[jensend]

i vote no. did anybody else notice in the canfax out on friday that captive ownership of the week's slaughter was down to 69%; said it was down from previous weeks? how can they live with so much uncertainty?