Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiFood Crisis in Mexico: A US Policy Disaster That Bodes Increased Immigration
Worldwide, people are suffering the effects of skyrocketing food prices. Mexico -- where over half the population are poor -- is part of this global disaster that, according to the World Bank, has already impoverished an estimated 100 million people. As Frances Moore Lappé of Food First indicates, this is perhaps the largest human rights crisis in decades; however, it is altogether avoidable because it is the product of bad policy. Mexico's vulnerability and the impacts on its population are easily anticipated as the result of eroding Mexican food security under U.S.-backed trade liberalization and the legacy of policies in the U.S., such as the recently approved 2008 Farm Bill, that grant unfair advantages to large agricultural corporations and prioritize profit over the basic rights of people.
In January 2006, a Mexican consumer needed about $74 to purchase the items in a market basket, a selection of basic products necessary for survival. By April 2008, the same items cost about $117 -- a staggering 58-percent increase in only 27 months. While food staples such as beans, rice, condensed milk, and eggs rose in price 79 to 114 percent over the course of 2007, there was only a 4.5-percent increase in wages.
The urgency of the issue is heard in the voice of a poor indigenous shopkeeper in Oaxaca: "I hope to God that prices come back down -- there is no hope otherwise." She then lamented, "Another one from our family will have to emigrate to the U.S."
This is a crisis, however, that has been in the making for over two decades. Wages for Mexican workers lost 82-percent of their purchasing power since 1982, the year when trade liberalization, privatization, and market deregulation were first imposed on Mexico by the U.S.-dominated International Monetary Fund. The same IMF structural adjustment programs, in conjunction with the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, plowed under Mexico's food security by mandating the privatization or dissolution of state-regulated grain reserves and price-support programs, sweeping reductions in farmer credit and subsidies, the deregulation of commodities markets, and the elimination of tariff and quota protections on imported agricultural products. These radical changes to Mexico's largely self-governed food system and the precipitous fall in real earning power, compounded by the dumping of U.S. agricultural commodities that were heavily subsidized under previous Farm Bills, made it utterly impossible for almost all Mexican small producers and most medium-size growers to maintain an internal market for their goods.
Mexicans can no longer produce the basic food their country needs, nor can they afford the products sold to them by U.S. agribusiness giants such as Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland. Twenty years of this "silent food crisis" have resulted in increased undocumented migration, rising crime, unplanned urbanization, and many more people trying to make their way in the informal economy - trends that are likely to amplify given current policy and the mounting issues affecting global food prices.
The new Farm Bill (approved in May), despite having been praised for domestic nutrition programs and financial support for small farms, maintains the unfair practice of designating the majority of its billions in subsidies to large agricultural conglomerates. As a result, large U.S. firms will keep the upper hand in setting the price for Mexican consumers.
Moreover, as it governs U.S. agricultural policy through 2012, the new law will continue subsidizing corn-based ethanol (now mandated to supplement every gallon of U.S. gasoline), furthering the trend of increased scarcity in corn -- the main staple in the Mexican diet -- and also raising the cost of other grains by diverting cropland for ethanol production. The World Bank recently stated in a leaked internal report that biofuel production accounts for 75 percent of the current rise in global food prices, a finding which brings further subsidization of corn-based ethanol into serious moral question.
The potential for windfall profits in the biofuel sector, combined with other factors such as the mass surge of unregulated investment coming out of the collapsed housing market, has created a bubble in agricultural commodities that is driving up prices. Rising costs of oil, which inflate fertilizer and transportation prices, as well as supply shortages due to overexploitation of groundwater and the devastation of harvests by floods and droughts, also contribute to the sudden, meteoric increases.
Having an integrated global food economy means that these alarming issues and their consequences hit the poor without restraint, and free market policy leaves little room to change local laws to safeguard people's economic rights. The food crisis many are confronting is the direct result of a failed U.S.-backed trade model and policies like the Farm Bill that rob Mexico -- and many other impoverished countries -- of their sovereignty in feeding their own people, potentially starving millions and distending people's need to migrate just to survive.
Robert M. Saper, originally from West Sunbury, PA, is a member of the Witness for Peace international team based in Oaxaca, Mexico; Witness for Peace is a Washington, DC, based non-profit organization that monitors and seeks to change U.S. military and economic policy in Latin America in support of peace, justice, and sustainable economies in the region. Robert and the WFP Mexico team can be contacted at mexico@witnessforpeace.org.
21 Comments so far
Show AllOligarchy is the same animal wherever it appears. It is always a parasite and always devours its host. Wherever it appears, a significant segment (never has to be more than 40%) of the population always accepts a top down, authoritarian, absolute, male dominant, gender slavery, exclusionary model. Yes, we do. That's how we got here.
We had the choice in the mid-60's to make a place for everyone at the table and to reject war as a way of life. Would could have ENDED poverty within 20 years and lifetime stable employment wouldn't even be a point of discussion. Fish don't talk about water unless it tastes bad. BUT, that would mean America, once and for all, turning her back on 4000 years of male supremacy, gender slavery, human slavery, exclusion, constant war, and oligarchy. Scared America shitless. Without those six things, American males had no sense of themselves and they went nuts. We couldn't handle the choices required by Freedom. We've been racing back to the future into a Corporate techno-slave plantation where no one has to make any decisions, only obey. And of course, if Master decides you are worth more dead, then you will be terminated and composted. A planet full of fertilized. Fertilizing what?
IMHO , Nafta, The IMF..WTO and other such organizations, that try to promote free trade in Agricultural goods, are trying to destroy the small indpendent farmer and to wrest the control of the food supply away from the individual.
They want the control of the food supply in the hands of the Multi_nationals, which will give them massive profits and tremendous power.
(This is NOT new...there very detailed accounts of collusion by Industrialists in America in the late 1800's and early 1900s to destroy the independent farmer. They found not only were the Indendent farmer too politically powerful as a group, but also felt that by destroying said farmers they could then gain access to cheap labor)
The Elites In Mexico can make far more money by selling the food to America rather then it being provided to the people of Mexico.
Peoples turned off their own plots of land and no longer able to feed themselves then MUST work for those elites for plarty wages just to earn enough to eat OR must try to slip into America.
The Concept of NAFTA is simple. It not about promoting free trade. It about destroying the Competition in the production of goods or monopolizing the access to resources so that it under the control of a handful of Corporations.
It is about driving down the costs of labor to maximize the return to Shareholders. It is about wealth trasnfer from the bottom up.
GwNorth August 13th, 2008 12:21 pm
Quite correct.
Would you care to address the problem that NAFTA caused the Mexican farmer's? Why all that food we are buying isn't produced side by side with food and staples enough for the Mexican market? Why they are short corn for tortilla's?
There are bunch of skunks in the woodpile here.
Actually Marc Mexico can feed itself. It is the second largest source of American food imports. It is the second largest source of Canadian food imports.
In the winter months 60 percent of all produce on the supermarket shelves is from Mexico.
The simple fact is that Americans can pay a higher price for that food then can the Mexicans.
Over 10 billion a year in food is exported from mexico into the United States a year.
part of the problem is that Mexico can not feed itself. This is a problem for a country with such a large population which is growing by leaps and bounds. Of course people will come to the US for work, but even more will come for something to fill their stomachs. Yes we should be a welcoming country, but on the other hand, should we as Americans accept business using Latino's as slave labor. How about a comprehensive labor law that does not distinguish between documanted labor and US native labor in terms of pay and taxation. In other words, equal pay and taxation for all labor preformed in the US. As to how Mexica feeds itself... somehow they have got to figure that one out on their own.
ladybug August 12th, 2008 2:27 pm
GwNorth August 12th, 2008 9:58 pm
Richard Paine August 12th, 2008 10:18 pm
These are all good posts and have good comments. NAFTA has been a disaster for all of us, but especially for the Mexican farmer and Mexican poor. We are going to have to help them as soon as we can.
The comparison with Ireland is very apt and is closer to the truth than you'd think. Many large farmers in Texas close to the border are also operating farms in Mexicop, but all of the produce comes here. Including the corn. And guess what? You can't tell the Mexican ear of corn from that American ear of corn. Can you spell subsidy profit plus?
Siouxrose August 12th, 2008 9:53 pm
On this one you are a bit wrong on this one. People did connect the dots. For various reasons, but they still connected them. 80% of the American people are not "right wing shills."
Border states understand whats going on better than most. Of course those poor folks are going to try to cross the border for jobs. They have been doing it all my life with no particular problem. But since 86 its been different.
The shills for big business that have sold their bill of goods to good caring people continue to push business's agenda. The whole immigration debate is a mirage. We had comprehensive immigration reform in 1986 which I supported, so could anyone explain why we need to do the exact same thing again?
Effectively as long as Americans are willing to subsidize big busniness's labor costs and allow Mexicos elites to continue to exploit their own people, the poverty will increase. You won't have to worry about Gaza or Darfur's starving people, we can simply go across the border.
We created this problem ourselve and in colusion with Mexico's elites, its up to us to solve it.
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m46386&hd=&size=1&l=e
People are dying of starvation in Gaza. Why is nobody on Common Dreams talking about it?
This flaming fiasco that is "global trade" will soon smoulder and extinguish. Everybody on the planet is coming to recognize that if "global trade" weren't so destructive, it would be the greatest joke in history.
Food will be the first sector to rise from the ashes. We're going to have local food security worldwide. Food, materials, and fuel, on 1/3 acre per person, as a right, enshrined in the consistution of every country, and any challenge will be suppressed.
Cuba has no "free trade" agreement with the USA. And Cuba is thriving, unlike Mexico.
I would say that almost all Third and Second World governments are simply cheap labor contractors for Western- (especially US-)
transnational corporations.
What U.S. citizens haven't awakened to is that the U.S. labor force has constantly "voted" for the same form of government...provided for them by the U.S. elite.
And this is realllllllllly a laugher.
The World Bank.....leaks a secret.....uh huh...memo about how ethanol has driven the cost of food up 75%????????
OKkkkkkkkkk...let's look at reality.
Currently, the farmer gets about 18% of your food dollar that you spend.
There used to be about 4 cents worth of corn in a box of corn flakes, now there is 6.8 cents worth in a box of corn flakes. Okkkkkkkkk....that corn has gone up about 80%.....but that box of corn flakes has gone up a buck......what gives?
What gives is that the cost of transportation, labor, packaging, heat, in store contruction costs, etc make up the diff. To blame this on ethanol is what the oil co's want you all to believe. Ethanol, according to the Wall Street Journal and government stats has kept the price of a gallon of gas approx 22 cents less than it would have been. So fork out that extra 3 cents for that box of corn flakes and thank the good Lord for ethanol when you are putting gas in your tank.
This is a silly article and not very well thought out. I am a farmer...
1st off:
I am all for cutting out subsidies. I would at least be able to get a decent return on my investment then. Altho, I will admit that people in the cities would be paying prob 3-4 times more for food.
Would you all be satisfied with that?
Another thing. It seems consumers want "cheap products". Look at what has happened to manufacturing in the US. China, etc, can produce cheaper than we can so we import our tvs, radios, furniture, wood, just to name a few items.
So the solution is to cut out all the subsidies, let the farmers on marginal ground go broke, let me get rich while you gladly pay 15 bucks for a gallon of milk, 30 bucks for a steak, etc.
Is that what you really want?
The article says Mexico can no longer feed itself. I find it a shame that along with the loss of many other things in our country, we seem to be losing the proper use of our language as well. For shouldn't the sentence read, Mexico is no longer allowed to feed themselves. There is quite some difference here ......these and many other failed policies and deregulations are taking the world to where? Well, maybe the hungry and displaced can get work building the Homeland Security Fence.
As I recall one of the things that the Government of Mexico was forced to do in order to become part of NAFTA was to remove wide swathes of land from a semi-protected status. These lands had been set aside since the days of Pancho Villa and were intended for subsistence agriculture.
This was called the Ejido system
Large numbers of peasants farmed the lands and were basically kicked off after this status was removed.
Multinationals and or weatlhy landownwers then bought up the land. Much was transformed in Cattle ranches to grow meat for export to The USA . Others saw logging companies come in and wipe the areas of all tree cover.
The persons that were employed on the new Ranches or in the logging industry were much smaller in number then the number of people once supported via subsistence agriculture, so the surplus of workers headed North.
In short it my belief that there are just not a whole lot of these small independent farmers left.
Now in advancing this agenda it was claimed that the Mexicans would now be able to grow food under a free market system and export it to the United States. The problem here was one that Ireland expeirienced under the great Potato Famine.
In Ireland a few wealthy landowners controlled all the land. The Irish were forced to marginal lands where little but potatoes could be grown. Those same landowners closed off much of the land they owned and rised things like wool, wheat, corn mutton, butter and the like. Now one would think this meant food aplenty and wealth aplenty for the irish.
Not the case. The wealthy landowners kept all the profits paying a pittance to the tenant farmers they kept on. THEN they sold all the surplus food to Britian and the Continent because they got a better price for it there.
As the famine was ongoing they were shipping toms of food from Ireland to the Continent and Britain.
The Irish starved in a land of plenty and were called shiftless, lazy and stupid for relying so heavily on the potato as a source of food.
I expect much the same happens in Mexico. More profit selling the food to rich Americans.
PK
JERRY D ROSE: Not everyone connects the dots. For all those right wing imbeciles who use shrill castigations against "illegal aliens," their listeners never hear the truth, the link between decimated profits in Mexico (among generations of farmers) and the US subsidized big agra's monstrous tentacles, and why all those poor people are risking their lives to cross the US border.
>>If corn prices have doubled, shouldn't the family with a couple of acres outside town be in a perfect position to grow and compete in the local marketplace?<<
Only if they don't need fuel to produce or harvest and don't need any pesticides. I am with you though on the idea. Here in the Bay Area, farmer's markets are in line or cheaper often than safeway for produce (when the markets are on from Spring to Autumn). We pay about the same, but the farmers get 100% of the $ and they are local mostly and all within 100 miles of here as far as I can tell. High prices for fuel and food are going to make alternative production, non agrabusiness production, more common.
Maybe I don't get it, but it seems to me that the best thing for local, indigenous farmers is for the prices of international agricultural products to rise. There must be a point where the rise of imported food prices makes local food production viable. If corn prices have doubled, shouldn't the family with a couple of acres outside town be in a perfect position to grow and compete in the local marketplace?
I read The Economist Magazine shortly after the collpase of the Doha round of trade talks, and they went and on how bad this would be for the "poor" of the world and how it had been demosntrated over and over again that "liberalized" trade polcies helped to lift peoples out ov poverty and in fact ensured that the people of the world could be fed.
Absolute nonsense.
What this article refers to has been repeated over and over again in countires that were forced to open their markets, and remove protections for their farmers.
The truth is the Agri Busineesses do NOT WANT independent farmers. They want to drive them out of business and take control of their lands. They want them out so they can totally control the food supply and ensure massive profits years down the road.
They work in conjunction with the Governments who subsidize them with taxpayer dollars and will continue to subsidize them till no one is able to get any food unless it suppplied by one of the favored Agri-businesses.
This is raw capitalism in action. It will destroy us.
PK
In all "modesty," I'd like to refer to an article I posted last February concerning the relationship between international migrations and neo-liberal economic policies. While my article goes beyond the "Mexican food crisis" to other world economic dislocations and also deals with the effect of "internal" neo-liberalism on U.S. workers (and their resulting relations with immigrant ones), the terms of the analysis are essentially the same. One caveat: I've yet to produce the promised piece on a "just plain liberal" policy of international economy.
http://www.countercurrents.org/rose120208.htm
Totally predictable result of Immoral Government Policy. When are we gonna learn. How much longer before the masses revolt?
And the Mexican government ALWAYS cooperates happily with the "free" trade policies imposed by the US. The Mexican politicians are scumbags that only care about their own asses and love to see half the population starving while they live like kings.
And then they still have the guts to come to the US and ask the goverment here to treat nicely undocumented people!