I have said for a while that I would post something on my views on fair trade as many have inquired as to why I am not pro fair trade. Basically it comes down to the fact that a lot of large companies have always paid farmers well for high quality products. I am going to stick to the topic of coffee since it is the subject I know the most about.
Starbucks is a company that has been hated by lefties since I can remember it being around. I have heard many of them claiming that the beans are practically stolen from starving farmers in
Do you really think the price of fair trade products isn’t too high, and do you think that the entire extra amount you pay at the till goes to the farmers? The math just doesn’t add up for me. I believe the supermarkets are not being sufficiently open about their pricing of Fair trade products. I would like to see more of the premium going back to the Farmers if they are going to claim to be “Fair”
The basic argument for only buying fair trade coffee is that the other farmers don’t get paid enough. Does no one else see a flaw in this logic? Thinking that the “consumer power” of everyone buying fair trade will change the world is just ridiculous. Fair Trade companies will satisfy the market for people who can afford to pay extortionate prices for not-especially-wonderful coffee. The rest of us will continue drinking good coffee and nothing will change.
Fair trade is becoming so mainstream now; it is frustrating that no one is considering it seriously. On any given day at work I have about a dozen people ask for a “Free Trade” coffee. This is hilarious, they have all heard that free trade is good and/or fair trade is good, but the truth is they are non-interchangeable.
Free trade allows all farmers to sell in any market they choose at any price they choose. Fair trade is rigging the market in favour of friends and denying others the right to do business on equal terms. In any normal sense, it is unfair. If you believe is free trade you must also believe in an equal playing field.
QED
5 comments:
I find your argument interesting, but I think providing some sources would make it a whole lot more convincing. Are Starbucks' coffee growers really being compensated that well? How much is "ridiculously high"? How does this compare to other growers? How much of that money is actually profit for the growers and how much just covers expenses?
I don't know the details of this understandably complicated issue, but I do think Starbucks may also not be the best example for a pro-free trade (not fair trade, lolz!) argument. I think much of the concern is about the crap you buy at the supermarket, like Maxwell House, etc... Where does THAT coffee (if you can call it that) come from? Or how about Tim Hortons for that matter.
As far as quality is concerned, it's also a very grand generalization to suggest fair trade coffee isn't up to the quality standards of other growers. It really depends on the individual grower. There's plenty of terrible free trade coffee as well, after all.
Anyway, you've made me want to learn more.
Right, this is gonna be long, too... the reason I suggested posting some sources was from the beginning of your post:
"Basically it comes down to the fact that a lot of large companies have always paid farmers well for high quality products."
This is the exact opposite of everything I've ever heard and if it was true, it would eliminate the need for fair-trade coffee, wouldn't it?
Oxfam has some reading material to support the idea of Fair Trade Coffee on their site:
http://www.oxfam.ca/campaigns/fairTrade.htm
Basically, they suggest that small growers are forced by foreign tarrifs and other trade barriers to sell their crops to middlemen, who frequently take advantage of their monopolistic position. In other words, the North American purchaser rarely has any contact with the actual growers.
On the other hand, you make a good point about the future sustainability of fair trade coffee. As long as retailers continue to sell unfairly traded goods, the problem is not solved. Providing a competing product (like fair trade coffee) may alleviate strain on some farmers, but it is not a fix-all solution. Here's a crude analogue: I can open a high-quality hamburger stand on my street, but that's not going to eliminate the need for a McDonald's in the eyes of consumers.
Does that make sense at all? No? Okay, I'm just going to stop here.
Thank you for reading Chapter 2 of my novel, called: "How to argue about shit you totally don't understand."
So what you're saying is... Wilco is performing at the Playhouse?!
yes Dave, thats exactly what i was saying. Remember our blog comment wars? That was sweet.
I think your missing the point of fair trade products (that go far beyond coffee as you hinted at in the beginning of your argument). It's the tariffs and trade barriers that are really of concern with big companies that are not adequately compensating farmers and others for their products. (Tim Horton's is a prime example and if you look into their practices I assure you you will be surprised.) With fair trade, it ensures the equal playing field that you mentioned at the end of your post.
I think it's an interesting argument although I'm still not quite sure why you think it's so bad. It's not really so much about the actual price that the farmer is paid. Let's say fair trade and non-fair trade farmers are paid the same (which they aren't but just for argument's sake), it's the large tarrifs that the non-fair trade farmers have to endure that make it so that there profit is minimal compared to the amount of work that they do.
At best, fair trade works and at worst, it's ineffective. So, I don't see the big deal.
Post a Comment