General Discussion

Igel

(37,535 posts)

35. That's the producer-side.

Mon Dec 19, 2011, 12:35 AM

Dec 2011

If you produce and can't find a way of transporting it to market without losing even more money, you trash it. Yeah, people may be starving, but few are going to trash their own livelihood for anonymous people someplace else.

Now think about it from the worker's side. You're unemployed, meaning you have excess labor. The farmer would hurt himself by shipping produce at a loss, with labor costs being part of the reason for the loss. Would you work for free (or pennies) in order to make sure that the producer would at least break even if he were to ship his produce to market, providing food for those starving?

Probably not, especially when you realize that this would depress prices. This would make it harder for other producers to ship to market and cause them to have to fire workers or reduce their wages.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I Am Seething !!! - Did You See 'There Goes The Neighborhood' On 60 Minutes ??? [View all] WillyT Dec 2011 OP

In the great depression... rgbecker Dec 2011 #1

EXACTLY. This is not a productivity problem, it is an INCOME problem. aletier_v Dec 2011 #6

Problem is, the "leaders" of our nation, and those who control our leaders truedelphi Dec 2011 #56

Sad commentary on the state of humanity. tabatha Dec 2011 #2

Empty homes decrease property values further. boppers Dec 2011 #3

They're most likely tearing down the ones deemed to be hazardous Warpy Dec 2011 #11

My thoughts, as well. nt MADem Dec 2011 #16

Yes, they are. Some of the houses are little more than shells. eppur_se_muova Dec 2011 #28

"The banks" can learn nothing. Igel Dec 2011 #34

Wish I could rec your post for its insight into coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #46

The house right next to ours is a perfect example SoCalDem Dec 2011 #48

but if you listen to morons like Limbaugh or Gingrinch, we need "more productivity". aletier_v Dec 2011 #4

Reminds me of Steinbeck's descriptions of destroying piles of fruit when people are starving deutsey Dec 2011 #5

+1 Starry Messenger Dec 2011 #22

That's the producer-side. Igel Dec 2011 #35

Hence the problem with the system, imo deutsey Dec 2011 #40

The social contract of a civilized society should include, CrispyQ Dec 2011 #53

But therein lies the rub.... Moostache Dec 2011 #50

I have seen this before NNN0LHI Dec 2011 #7

Almost as depressing as their report on homeless school kids in FL a few weeks ago. Bozita Dec 2011 #8

If you actually believe those houses torn down were worth that much, don't fall for it. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #9

agree - but the remarkable part is that the county/city is spending $150 million to banned from Kos Dec 2011 #10

The county and city will bill the owner of the house for the tear-down. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #17

Really? ... Going after the banks? Bozita Dec 2011 #18

The property owner gets notified of the impending decision. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #19

Please Clear Up The Confusion... They Will Go After The "Owners" Of The House... WillyT Dec 2011 #21

Banks. nt NutmegYankee Dec 2011 #30

Whoever has their name recorded as deed holder gets the bill. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #31

Very few houses in this country SheilaT Dec 2011 #20

neither are cars shanti Dec 2011 #29

At least cars have become much, much SheilaT Dec 2011 #58

and very few are built to suit the climate. demigoddess Dec 2011 #39

The advent of air-conditioning SheilaT Dec 2011 #59

The absurdity of Capitalism. Odin2005 Dec 2011 #12

Exactly! mckara Dec 2011 #33

Refinancing - cashing out equity BOHICA12 Dec 2011 #13

yes but we have trillions for our enemies in the pentagon, the squanderers of the nation's wealth n msongs Dec 2011 #14

Yes. And there was plenty of food in Ireland during the Great Hunger... annabanana Dec 2011 #15

I liked the County Official's attitude. NutmegYankee Dec 2011 #23

There are a couple homes that have sat empty here abelenkpe Dec 2011 #24

I don't get it. Wouldn't the banks rather get SOME income from the house Kablooie Dec 2011 #25

I believe the County is taking the land from the banks NutmegYankee Dec 2011 #32

The house would have to be brought up to code first. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #37

Two problems with that theory-- mistertrickster Dec 2011 #42

Before getting an occupancy permit from the city, code violations must be rectified. Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #44

It happens in my city everyday. nt mistertrickster Dec 2011 #54

Saw it... I wonder if they feel that they shouldn't occupy their homes, fuck the banksters... MrMickeysMom Dec 2011 #26

K & R Dewey Finn Dec 2011 #27

Cleveland has lost half is population in fifty years Sen. Walter Sobchak Dec 2011 #36

Looks like a steam shovel ready job to me Fla_Democrat Dec 2011 #38

The city paid $150 million to tear these places down frazzled Dec 2011 #41

If you live in a house and don't maintain it, you get fined. mistertrickster Dec 2011 #43

This is exactly WHY Bailing Out the Banks during the "Troubled Assets" crisis.... bvar22 Dec 2011 #45

And later on in the telecast, they featured Meryl Streep in her new movie about Margaret Thatcher. HughBeaumont Dec 2011 #47

I think what they failed to mention is the banks didn't lose a dime on those foreclosures.... dmosh42 Dec 2011 #49

Housing is nothing more than something to make money from in their eyes AZ Progressive Dec 2011 #51

When China relocates entire cities, towns, and villages we proclaim we are better than that... hunter Dec 2011 #52

"Disposable". Trillo Dec 2011 #55

HOUSE THE HOMELESS Fire Walk With Me Dec 2011 #57