|
|
|
|
|
|
by bawolff
14 days ago
|
|
|
But how much less then normal. Like the logic here is the scalper company buys all the crops and then resells at an exorbitant mark up because everyone needs to eat, but then the market price becomes what the scalper is selling for. Would the farmer really leave that much on the table? They may be willing to give some discount to sell all at once, but there comes a point where it is no longer worth it to them to do so. The whole scalping thing only works if you can buy low sell high, but if you sell high the people you are buying from will start to notice that they too can sell higher to other people. Concerts are different because there are brand reasons to keep prices low. Farmers aren't a charity, they aren't going to sell significantly below market price just for the good vibes. |
|
|
This makes me think that it is possible for corporations to suppress the price on the farmer side and fix it on the consumer side.
This happened to at least some crops in Turkey in the past, for example farmers were selling hazelnut for 15TRY/kg and you could only buy it for 100TRY/kg in big cities. Farmers were actually complaining that they couldn't even make a profit from growing hazelnut.
Corporations would like to do this with even water if given the chance as Nestle CEO was saying himself in a famous video.
So they would for example do it with bread and starve people in the process if it means they can make money. And I think that they could easily do this for example in US if they didn't correctly fear that people would force the goverment to smash them.
Also the selling format doesn't have to be the crop itself. For example they make nutella from hazelnut. So farmers can't associate it directly with their selling price even though it is obvious that they are getting shafted.
Another possibility is the farmer selling 80% to the corporation for the normal price and then selling the rest at a massive markup so both profit. Same thing that is happening with ram manufacturers. Then the whole thing is justified as free market and only the consumers get hurt because in the end you have to buy RAM. Or equally the corporation could pay the farmer a 20% bonus and still make 80% extra profit on end consumer. Farmer might not object if the scheme is dependant on the corporation.