[razoroccam]

Americans should not subsidize anyone, whether domestic or foreign.

Here is how the subsidies work. We (you and I, the taxpayers) pay our farmers to not grow, or grow a product that is essentially unprofitable under free market. So, a bushel of wheat, which is unprofitable to be grown, is still grown and sold in the market at a low price.

Farmers in third world countries, who can grow wheat and sell at a profit under open market conditions, cannot compete against the subsidized wheat sold under low prices.

That is why Wolfowitz is correct in arguing that subsidies are against free markets.

[hedgetrimmer]

That is why Wolfowitz is correct in arguing that subsidies are against free markets.

The topic is the marxist rhetoric of "free trade". If you read the article, Wolfowitz is arguing that American policy pits rich against poor, he does not talk about whether the "poor countries" can compete in "free market". In fact the sum of the article is that "poor countries" cannot compete so the US must change its domestic policy to give them the advantange. So you must think that the definition of "free trade" is to give welfare to poor countries through trade, is that right? Because that is what Wolfowitz says we must do.

[Sybeck1]

This farmer's son agrees. My dad was paid for land set aside or not produced. Terrible.