To: Toddsterpatriot; 1rudeboy; expat_panama; hedgetrimmer
Tariffs and quotas on imported sugar saved 2,261 jobs during the 1990s. As a result of those restrictions, the average household pays $21 more per year for sugar. The total cost, nationally, sums to $826,000 for each job saved. But isn't sugar an issue of national security?
28 posted on
10/25/2006 6:30:48 AM PDT by
Mase
To: Mase
But isn't sugar an issue of national security? Let them eat cake?
32 posted on
10/25/2006 6:36:23 AM PDT by
frithguild
(The Freepers moved as a group, like a school of sharks sweeping toward an unaware and unarmed victim)
To: Mase
You may remember that sugar subsidies grew out of shortages and rationing of sugar experienced during WWII when access to sources in the Pacific were blocked. In that sense it was relatd to national security.
48 posted on
10/25/2006 6:59:16 AM PDT by
ClaireSolt
(Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
To: Mase
But isn't sugar an issue of national security?Oh, sure, during wartime we won't be able to import the sugar for our cereal and we'll have to use aspartame. You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Besides, Willie Green said higher priced sugar was necessary to keep our sugar cheap and readily available.
95 posted on
10/25/2006 7:45:30 AM PDT by
Toddsterpatriot
(Goldbugs, immune to logic and allergic to facts. You know who you are.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson