I've located this memorable article in my archive, and though it would be worth a while to share with everyone. In a university commencement address several years ago, Brian Dyson, CEO of Coca Cola Enterprises, spoke of the relation of work to one's other commitments: "Imagine life as a game in which your are juggling some five balls in the air. You name them - work, family, health, friends, and spirit and you're keeping all of these in the air.
The Present
You will soon understand that work is a rubber ball. If you drop it, it will bounce back. But the other four balls - family, health, friends, and spirit - are made of glass. If you drop one of these, they will be irrevocably scuffed, marked, nicked, damaged, or even shattered. They will never be the same. You must understand that and strive for balance in your life. How? Don't undermine your worth by comparing yourself with others. It is because we are different that each of us is special.
Don't set your goals by what other people deem important. Only you know what is best for you. Don't take for granted the things closest to your heart. Cling to them as you would your life, for without them, life is meaningless. Don't let your life slip through your fingers by living in the past or for the future. By living your life one day at a time, you live ALL the days of your life.
Don't give up when you still have something to give. Nothing is really over until the moment you stop trying. Don't be afraid to encounter risks. It is by taking chances that we learn how to be brave. Don't shut love out of your life by saying it's impossible to find. The quickest way to receive love is to give it; the fastest way to lose love is to hold it too tightly; and the best way to keep love is to give it wings.
Don't run through life so fast that you forget not only where you've been, but also where you are going.
Don't forget, a person's greatest emotional need is to feel appreciated.
Don't be afraid to learn. Knowledge is weightless, a treasure you can always carry easily.
Don't use time or words carelessly. Neither can be retrieved. Life is not a race, but a journey to be savored each step of the way.
Yesterday is History, Tomorrow is a Mystery, and Today is a gift: that's why we call it "The Present."
Water.org
Science of 350
350 parts per million is what many scientists, climate experts, and progressive national governments are now saying is the safe upper limit for CO2 in our atmosphere. Our mission is to inspire the world to rise to the challenge of the climate crisis—to create a new sense of urgency and of possibility for our planet.
Our Hero
"Sometimes it takes a crisis to awaken us from our slumber. But once aroused, the American people can accomplish miracles." - T. Boone Pickens
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Movie Clips with Lessons to be Learned
"Life is Relative"
"Don't Underestimate the Intelligence of Animals"
"Art of Management"
"Always Remember who Where You Stand"
"Keep Your Friends Close, but Your Enemies Closer"
"Danger of Ignorance"
"Duty?"
"Life's Lesson to Remember #1"
"Life's Lesson to rembember #2"
"Don't Underestimate the Intelligence of Animals"
"Art of Management"
"Always Remember who Where You Stand"
"Keep Your Friends Close, but Your Enemies Closer"
"Danger of Ignorance"
"Duty?"
"Life's Lesson to Remember #1"
"Life's Lesson to rembember #2"
My Opinion Article on the Global Grain Crisis
Globally, the rising cost of food has taken every households by surprise, and the challenge to satisfy the global demand for grains promises to make for an interesting year for 2008.
The price of wheat has gone up by 130% over the last year. Rice has doubled in price in Asia in the first three months of 2008 alone. The price increase of soybean also is about par with these 2 grains.
From Asia-to-Americas-to-Africa, people have been pouring out to the street in anger at being unable to afford the daily food necessity. In fear of political turmoil, world leaders are sending out SOS signals for increased food aid, increased monetary aid, and technology aid to boost agricultural production.
Grain exporting countries, meanwhile, are closing their borders to protect their own domestic markets, while other countries have been forced into panic buying.
These are definitely not a typical price blip and/or food shortage. What we are witnessing is a structural meltdown of grain market, the direct result of three decades of Globalization. Globally, farmers produced a record 2.3 billion tons of grain in 2007, up 4% compare to 2006. Since 1960’s, the world’s grain output has tripled, while the population has doubled. As such, the bottom line is that the global production of grain is more than enough to feed the entire population. The problem is that the food produced doesn’t get to all of those who need it. Less than half of the world’s grain production is directly eaten by people. The rest go into animal feeds and, increasingly, biofuels (ethanol, bio-diesel, etc..) – massive inflexible industrial chains.
The grain crisis is net result of allowing food to be transformed from something that nourishes people and provides them with secure livelihoods into a commodity for speculation and bargaining. The perverse logic of world food system has come to a head, system that puts the profits of investors before the people’s need of food.
Market Realities
Market experts and the policy makers have come out with a number of explanations for the current grain crisis that everyone has heard over and over again: drought and other environmental issues affecting harvests; rising demand in developing nations such as China and India where people are supposedly eating more and better than in the past; crops and lands being massively diverted into biofuel production; and so on. All of these issues, of course, are contributing to the current food crisis. But these issues do not address the full depth of what is happening. In a nut shell, there is something more fundamental issues that brings all these issues together, and these issues are kept out of public discussion.
The various explanations by market experts and the policy makers can not obscure the fact that today’s food crisis is the outcome of both an incessant push towards a “Green Revolution” agricultural model since the 1950s and the trade liberalization and structural adjustment policies imposed on poor countries by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund since the 1970s. These policy prescriptions were reinforced with the establishment of the World Trade Organization in the mid-1990s and, more recently, through a barrage of bilateral free trade and investment agreements. Together with a series of other measures, they have led to the ruthless dismantling of tariffs and other tools that poor developing countries had created to protect local agricultural production. These countries have been forced to open their markets and lands to global agribusiness, speculators and subsidized food exports from rich developed countries.
In that process, fertile lands have been diverted away from providing local food supplies to the production of global commodities or off-season and high-value crops for Western markets. Today, roughly 70% of all developing countries are net importers of food. And, ironically, of the estimated 845 million hungry people in the world, 80% are small farmers. Add to this, the reengineering of credit and financial markets to create a massive debt industry, with no control on investors, and the depth of the problem becomes clear. Agricultural policy has completely lost touch with its most basic goal of feeding people. Hunger hurts and people are desperate.
The UN World Food Program estimates that recent price hikes have meant that an additional 100 million people can no longer afford to eat adequately. Governments are frantically seeking shelter from the system. The fortunate ones, with export stocks, are pulling out of the global market to cut their domestic prices off from the skyrocketing world prices.
With wheat export bans or restrictions in Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine and Argentina, a third of the global market has now been closed off. The situation with rice is even worse: China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, India and Cambodia have banned or severely restricted exports, leaving just a few sources of export supply, mainly Thailand and the US.
Countries like Bangladesh can’t buy the rice they need now because the prices are so high. For years the World Bank and the IMF have told countries that a liberalized market would provide the most efficient system for producing and distributing food, yet today the world’s poorest countries are forced into an intense bidding war against speculators and traders, who are having a field day. Hedge funds and other sources of hot money are pouring billions of dollars into commodities to escape sliding stock markets and the credit crunch, putting food stocks further out of poor people’s reach.
According to some estimates, investment funds now control 50–60% of the wheat traded on the world’s biggest commodity markets. One firm calculates that the amount of speculative money in commodities futures – markets where investors do not buy or sell a physical commodity, like rice, corn, or wheat, but merely bet on price movements – has ballooned from $5 billion in 2000 to $175 billion to 2007.
Crisis Benefactors
The benefactors from current global grain has never been more obvious.
The most basic element of food production is soil. The industrialized grain production system is a chemical fertilizer junkie. It needs more and more of the fertilizer just to keep alive, eroding soils and their potential to support crop yields in the process. In the current context of tight grain supplies, the small clique of corporations that control the world’s fertilizer market can charge what they want – and that’s exactly what they are doing. Profits at Cargill’s Mosaic Corporation, which controls much of the world’s potash and phosphate supply, more than doubled last year. The world’s largest potash producer, Canada’s Potash Corp, made more than $1 billion in profit, up more than 70% from 2006.
Panicking now about future supplies, developing countries are becoming desperate to boost their grain production, giving these corporations additional leverage. In April 2008, the joint offshore trading arm for Mosaic and Potash hiked the price of its potash by 40% for buyers from Southeast Asia and by 85% for those from Latin American. India had to pay 130% more than last year, and China 227% more.
Profit increase for some of the world’s largest fertilizer corporations
Company Profits 2007 (US$ million) Increase from 2006
Potash Corp (Canada) 1,100 72%
Yara (Norway) 1,116 44%
Sinochem (China) 1,100 95%
Mosaic (US) 708 141%
ICL (Israel) 535 43%
K + S (Germany) 420 3%
Source: Compiled from corporate reports
While big money is being made from fertilizers, it is just a sideline for Cargill. Its biggest profits come from global trading in agricultural commodities, which, together with a few other big traders, it pretty much monopolizes. In April 2008, Cargill had announced that its profits from agricultural commodity trading for the first quarter of 2008 were 86% higher than the same period in 2007. “Demand for food in developing economies and for energy worldwide is boosting demand for agricultural goods, at the same time that investment monies have streamed into commodity markets,” said Greg Page, Cargill’s chairman and chief executive officer. “Prices are setting new highs and markets are extraordinarily volatile. In this environment, Cargill’s team has done an exceptional job measuring and assessing price risk, and managing the large volume of grains, oilseeds and other commodities moving through our supply chains for customers globally.”
Profit increase for some of the world’s largest grain traders
Company Profits 2007 (US$ million) Increase from 2006
Cargill (US) 2,340 36%
ADM (US) 2,200 67%
ConAgra (US) 764 30%
Bunge (US) 738 49%
Noble Group (Singapore) 258 92%
Marubeni (Japan) 90* 43%*
Source: Compiled from corporate reports
*Data is for Marubeni’s Agri-Marine division only.
Absent from this list is Louis Dreyfus (France), a private agricultural commodities trader with annual sales in excess of $22 billion, which does not report its profits. Indeed, all of the big grain traders are making record profits. Bunge, another big food trader, saw its profits of the last fiscal quarter of 2007 increase by $245 million, or 77%, compared with the same period of the previous year. The 2007profits registered by ADM, the second largest grain trader in the world, rose by 65% to a record $2.2 billion. Thailand’s Charoen Pokphand Foods, a major player in Asia, is forecasting revenue growth of 237% this year.
The world’s big food processors, some of which are commodity traders themselves as well, are also making record profits. Nestlé’s global sales grew 7% last year. “We saw this coming, so we hedged by forward-buying raw materials”, says François-Xavier Perroud, Nestlé’s spokesman. Margins are up at Unilever, too. “Commodity pressures have increased sharply, but we have successfully offset these through timely pricing action and continued delivery from our savings programs”, says Patrick Cesar, Group CEO of Unilever. “We will not sacrifice our margins and market share.”
The food corporations don’t seem to be making these profits off the back of the retailers. UK supermarket Tesco reports profits up 12.3% from last year, a record rise. Other major retailers, such as France’s Carrefour and the US’s Wal-Mart, say that food sales are the main factor sustaining their profit increases. Wal-Mart’s Mexican division, Wilmer, which handles a third of overall food sales in Mexico, reported an 11% increase in profits for the first quarter of 2008. (At the same time Mexicans are demonstrating in the streets because they can no longer afford to make tortillas.) It seems that nearly every corporate player in the global food chain is making a killing from the food crisis. The seed and agrochemical companies are doing well too. Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, reported a 44% increase in overall profits in 2007. DuPont, the second-largest, said that its 2007 profits from seeds increased by 19%, while Signet, the top pesticide manufacturer and third largest company for seeds, saw profits rise 28% in the first quarter of 2008. Such record profits have nothing to do with any new value that these corporations are creating and they are not one-off windfalls from a sudden shift in supply and demand. Instead, they are a reflection of the extreme power that these middlemen have accrued through the globalization of the grain supply system. Intimately involved with the shaping of the grain trade rules that govern today’s grain supply system, tightly in control of markets, and the ever more complex financial systems through which global trade operates, these companies are in perfect position to turn grain scarcity into immense profits. The fact remains, “People Have to Eat, Whatever the Cost”.
Current Situation
The global food crisis intensified as Kazakhstan, one of the world’s biggest wheat exporters ban the export and rice prices shot up to a record high after Indonesia ban the export.
In another sign of grain crisis, a big food company in Japan, Nihon Shokuhin Kako, said high corn prices had forced it to buy cheaper genetically modified corn for the first time, breaking a social, though not legal, taboo, and signaling that opposition to genetically modified foods could weaken in the face of record grain prices.
Meanwhile, fresh wheat export ban in Kazakhstan, the world’s fifth largest exporter, and the rice export bans in Indonesia, threaten to trigger bans in other grain exporting countries, which will now face much higher demand from importing countries.
Hussein Allidina, at Morgan Stanley in New York, said pressure for export bans was likely to increase elsewhere as developing countries suffering high inflation tried to combat rising local prices by cutting back on exports of agriculture commodities.
The first arises from the fact that prices for commodities, including oil as well as most agricultural commodities, are typically quoted in US$....In substantive terms, the increase in US$ commodity prices is a big problem for the many Asian economies that have pursued their currencies peg to the US$ as a means of maintaining export competitiveness. The adverse impact on domestic consumers is now becoming obvious, and the only solution is to abandon the dollar peg and allow an appreciation. China is already moving in this direction.
A second important point is the impact of demand from the biofuel sector, particularly for corn in the US. The idea of making biofuels from food crops was always problematic. As the biofuel is long term government mandated program, and changing biofuel source from food crop to grass grown on marginal or non-arable land does not appear to be a short term viable solutions.
Finally, the biggest increases have been in wheat prices, reflecting the drought in Australia and in some other wheat producing countries. It seems likely, though it’s still impossible to prove, that human-induced climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of environmental issues i.e. draught. As such, it’s important not to regard climate change as a problem for the future. The fact remains, adverse effects are already here.
Grain Exporter Market
Corn:
Of the over 190 countries in the world, only a very few export corn. The other impression is how little of world-wide corn production is exported.
Top Corn Exporters
1. United States
2. Argentina
3. China
4. Brazil
5. South Africa
6. Hungary
7. Ukraine
The top three corn exporting countries account for 88 percent of the world's corn export. The United States held the largest share, marketing 62 percent of all corn exports.
Overall, the international corn export market has a structure more consistent with an oligopoly than a perfectly competitive market. Such indicators as the United States' serving as both the price leader and the residual supplier would be a natural expectation from this type of market structure.
Soybean:
Soybeans are the most imported agricultural commodity in the world both in terms of value and quantity.
United States leads the world in soybean production, with Second-place Brazil, followed by Argentina.
Top Soybean Exporters
1. Brazil
2. United States
3. Argentina
The top three soybean exporting countries account for 90 percent of the world's soybean export. The United States alone digest 40 percent of all corn exports.
Wheat:
The International Grain Council estimates that world wheat production will drop 7 million from last season to 607 million tons for the 2007-8 season. This represents a 3.2% decline from the global harvest of 626.5 million tons just two seasons ago.
While world wheat reserves are the lowest in 25 years, demand for grain remains robust. Economists caution that scarcer wheat will push up food prices and accelerate inflation. That scenario seems increasingly likely, as wheat futures hit a high of $7.59 this month on the Chicago Board of Trade. This represents a price increase of more than 50% in less than 3 months.
Top Ten Wheat Producers
1. China
2. India
3. United States
4. Russia
5. France
6. Canada
7. Australia
8. Germany
9. Pakistan
10. Turkey
The top 10 producers accounted for over two-thirds of global wheat harvests.
Top Wheat Exporters
1. United States
2. Australia
3. Canada
4. France
5. Argentina
6. Russia
7. Germany
8. United Kingdom
9. Kazakhstan
10. India
The top ten wheat exporting countries account for 80 percent of the world's soybean export. The United States held the largest share, marketing 30 percent of all wheat exports.
Food, Strategic Commodity
In an normal economic environment, demand for goods and services decreases if prices become too high. Buyers of U.S. grains (corn, soybeans and wheat) seem to be ignoring this economic principle as the U.S.'s grain stocks inventories are reaching critically low levels.
With global demand for grain at record levels and a weak U.S. dollar, foreign buyers are outbidding domestic buyers for American grains. While the higher agricultural commodity prices are good for crop agriculture, there are disconcerting downsides.
Global food consumers are going to have to pay more. U.S. ended 2007 with monthly inflation rate on food nearly 5% higher. It is estimated that the food inflation rate might be as much as 6% in 2008.
Also, discussions about food security in 2008 may become a paramount global issue as the discussions would address whether U.S. should allow the foreign sector to buy U.S.’s food. The main objective of the discussion would appear to be “Is food a strategic item that U.S. needs to keep in the U.S.?
For some U.S. crops, it's almost too late. The 2007 U.S. wheat crop is virtually sold out, while domestic soybean stocks soon will fall below a 20-day supply. Corn inventories are stronger, but with demand from export markets, the livestock industry, and ethanol plants, supplies also could be just as scarce for the 2008 crop. The condition could become more serious if adverse weather trims U.S. crop yields this summer and fall.
The situation is reminiscent of another run on U.S. grain one generation ago, and this is a very rare circumstance. The last time U.S. had this kind of uncertainty on food supplies was the early 1970s when the former Soviet Union became a major buyer of wheat in the U.S. In the fall of 1972 they were such aggressive buyers that they essentially bought the pantry out of U.S.’s available wheat supplies.
In 1973 U.S. also virtually ran out of soybeans. The U.S. Congress and president responded by saying U.S. cannot let the rest of the world have our strategic food supply, so they embargoed all foreign soybean shipments until U.S. could replenish the supply.
A similar export prohibition is not expected to occur this year, however, grain prices will have to keep climbing to slow the buying frenzy.
Despite the higher prices, wheat exports are 32% higher than one year ago; 33% of the U.S. soybean crop will be exported and corn exports this year are on pace to break the 1979-1980 record of 2.4 billion bushels.
For the grain importing countries, relationship of the U.S. dollar to importing country’s currencies exchange rate plays important role as the trading is based on U.S. dollar.
We've seen the relationship of the U.S. dollar to foreign currencies change substantially in the last few years. The European euro has increased in value relative to the U.S. dollar by 40%, this had resulted the increase of purchasing power by 40%. If importing country’s currency weakens, the situation is opposite i.e the purchasing power decreases, buy less for same amount of currency.
It might take another month of grain price increases to get users to cut back, and it is estimated that the soybean prices could top $15/bu. before all is said and done.
Farmland values and cash-rental rates should continue rising as producers look to expand their crop acreage to meet the grain demand. It is also expected that agribusinesses – especially those that offer seed, agrichemicals, fertilizer, machinery and financial capital – to benefit.
The challenge to satisfy the world's hunger for grain promises to make for an interesting year for 2008.
There is no doubt that the food is a security issue for every country of the world. World agriculture has been so productive in the past 60 years that general food shortages have been rare. With this long period of abundant food supplies, most of the world's consumers in developed countries have forgotten food's strategic nature. Given the world's appetite for basic crops, the hope for 2008 is for favorable yields throughout the globe that will give consumers and crop producers more time to adjust to this new high-demand era.
Conclusion
To the matter of facts, based on current grain market environments, the most viable/reliable grain export country without any doubt is defacto UNITED STATE of AMERICA. In addition to crude oil price increase, the grain price increase may dictate country’s economic growth, at least in near term until the grain price become under control. Under this circumstances, in order to sustain economic growth rates, a country must maintain stable Socio-Political-Economic environments in order to maintain the currency strength, inflation under control, and prevent rise of interest rate. Below a exapmle of a chart that explains economic impact a country may suffer if fail to do so.
Unstable Socio-Political-Economic situation would yield below economic conditions
(i.e. continued demonstration for unreasonable demand for the government policy and/or Korean government is force to re-negotiate the beef treaty and antagonize foremost trade partner US)
Overview
The price of wheat has gone up by 130% over the last year. Rice has doubled in price in Asia in the first three months of 2008 alone. The price increase of soybean also is about par with these 2 grains.
From Asia-to-Americas-to-Africa, people have been pouring out to the street in anger at being unable to afford the daily food necessity. In fear of political turmoil, world leaders are sending out SOS signals for increased food aid, increased monetary aid, and technology aid to boost agricultural production.
Grain exporting countries, meanwhile, are closing their borders to protect their own domestic markets, while other countries have been forced into panic buying.
These are definitely not a typical price blip and/or food shortage. What we are witnessing is a structural meltdown of grain market, the direct result of three decades of Globalization. Globally, farmers produced a record 2.3 billion tons of grain in 2007, up 4% compare to 2006. Since 1960’s, the world’s grain output has tripled, while the population has doubled. As such, the bottom line is that the global production of grain is more than enough to feed the entire population. The problem is that the food produced doesn’t get to all of those who need it. Less than half of the world’s grain production is directly eaten by people. The rest go into animal feeds and, increasingly, biofuels (ethanol, bio-diesel, etc..) – massive inflexible industrial chains.
The grain crisis is net result of allowing food to be transformed from something that nourishes people and provides them with secure livelihoods into a commodity for speculation and bargaining. The perverse logic of world food system has come to a head, system that puts the profits of investors before the people’s need of food.
Market Realities
Market experts and the policy makers have come out with a number of explanations for the current grain crisis that everyone has heard over and over again: drought and other environmental issues affecting harvests; rising demand in developing nations such as China and India where people are supposedly eating more and better than in the past; crops and lands being massively diverted into biofuel production; and so on. All of these issues, of course, are contributing to the current food crisis. But these issues do not address the full depth of what is happening. In a nut shell, there is something more fundamental issues that brings all these issues together, and these issues are kept out of public discussion.
The various explanations by market experts and the policy makers can not obscure the fact that today’s food crisis is the outcome of both an incessant push towards a “Green Revolution” agricultural model since the 1950s and the trade liberalization and structural adjustment policies imposed on poor countries by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund since the 1970s. These policy prescriptions were reinforced with the establishment of the World Trade Organization in the mid-1990s and, more recently, through a barrage of bilateral free trade and investment agreements. Together with a series of other measures, they have led to the ruthless dismantling of tariffs and other tools that poor developing countries had created to protect local agricultural production. These countries have been forced to open their markets and lands to global agribusiness, speculators and subsidized food exports from rich developed countries.
In that process, fertile lands have been diverted away from providing local food supplies to the production of global commodities or off-season and high-value crops for Western markets. Today, roughly 70% of all developing countries are net importers of food. And, ironically, of the estimated 845 million hungry people in the world, 80% are small farmers. Add to this, the reengineering of credit and financial markets to create a massive debt industry, with no control on investors, and the depth of the problem becomes clear. Agricultural policy has completely lost touch with its most basic goal of feeding people. Hunger hurts and people are desperate.
The UN World Food Program estimates that recent price hikes have meant that an additional 100 million people can no longer afford to eat adequately. Governments are frantically seeking shelter from the system. The fortunate ones, with export stocks, are pulling out of the global market to cut their domestic prices off from the skyrocketing world prices.
With wheat export bans or restrictions in Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine and Argentina, a third of the global market has now been closed off. The situation with rice is even worse: China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, India and Cambodia have banned or severely restricted exports, leaving just a few sources of export supply, mainly Thailand and the US.
Countries like Bangladesh can’t buy the rice they need now because the prices are so high. For years the World Bank and the IMF have told countries that a liberalized market would provide the most efficient system for producing and distributing food, yet today the world’s poorest countries are forced into an intense bidding war against speculators and traders, who are having a field day. Hedge funds and other sources of hot money are pouring billions of dollars into commodities to escape sliding stock markets and the credit crunch, putting food stocks further out of poor people’s reach.
According to some estimates, investment funds now control 50–60% of the wheat traded on the world’s biggest commodity markets. One firm calculates that the amount of speculative money in commodities futures – markets where investors do not buy or sell a physical commodity, like rice, corn, or wheat, but merely bet on price movements – has ballooned from $5 billion in 2000 to $175 billion to 2007.
Crisis Benefactors
The benefactors from current global grain has never been more obvious.
The most basic element of food production is soil. The industrialized grain production system is a chemical fertilizer junkie. It needs more and more of the fertilizer just to keep alive, eroding soils and their potential to support crop yields in the process. In the current context of tight grain supplies, the small clique of corporations that control the world’s fertilizer market can charge what they want – and that’s exactly what they are doing. Profits at Cargill’s Mosaic Corporation, which controls much of the world’s potash and phosphate supply, more than doubled last year. The world’s largest potash producer, Canada’s Potash Corp, made more than $1 billion in profit, up more than 70% from 2006.
Panicking now about future supplies, developing countries are becoming desperate to boost their grain production, giving these corporations additional leverage. In April 2008, the joint offshore trading arm for Mosaic and Potash hiked the price of its potash by 40% for buyers from Southeast Asia and by 85% for those from Latin American. India had to pay 130% more than last year, and China 227% more.
Profit increase for some of the world’s largest fertilizer corporations
Company Profits 2007 (US$ million) Increase from 2006
Potash Corp (Canada) 1,100 72%
Yara (Norway) 1,116 44%
Sinochem (China) 1,100 95%
Mosaic (US) 708 141%
ICL (Israel) 535 43%
K + S (Germany) 420 3%
Source: Compiled from corporate reports
While big money is being made from fertilizers, it is just a sideline for Cargill. Its biggest profits come from global trading in agricultural commodities, which, together with a few other big traders, it pretty much monopolizes. In April 2008, Cargill had announced that its profits from agricultural commodity trading for the first quarter of 2008 were 86% higher than the same period in 2007. “Demand for food in developing economies and for energy worldwide is boosting demand for agricultural goods, at the same time that investment monies have streamed into commodity markets,” said Greg Page, Cargill’s chairman and chief executive officer. “Prices are setting new highs and markets are extraordinarily volatile. In this environment, Cargill’s team has done an exceptional job measuring and assessing price risk, and managing the large volume of grains, oilseeds and other commodities moving through our supply chains for customers globally.”
Profit increase for some of the world’s largest grain traders
Company Profits 2007 (US$ million) Increase from 2006
Cargill (US) 2,340 36%
ADM (US) 2,200 67%
ConAgra (US) 764 30%
Bunge (US) 738 49%
Noble Group (Singapore) 258 92%
Marubeni (Japan) 90* 43%*
Source: Compiled from corporate reports
*Data is for Marubeni’s Agri-Marine division only.
Absent from this list is Louis Dreyfus (France), a private agricultural commodities trader with annual sales in excess of $22 billion, which does not report its profits. Indeed, all of the big grain traders are making record profits. Bunge, another big food trader, saw its profits of the last fiscal quarter of 2007 increase by $245 million, or 77%, compared with the same period of the previous year. The 2007profits registered by ADM, the second largest grain trader in the world, rose by 65% to a record $2.2 billion. Thailand’s Charoen Pokphand Foods, a major player in Asia, is forecasting revenue growth of 237% this year.
The world’s big food processors, some of which are commodity traders themselves as well, are also making record profits. Nestlé’s global sales grew 7% last year. “We saw this coming, so we hedged by forward-buying raw materials”, says François-Xavier Perroud, Nestlé’s spokesman. Margins are up at Unilever, too. “Commodity pressures have increased sharply, but we have successfully offset these through timely pricing action and continued delivery from our savings programs”, says Patrick Cesar, Group CEO of Unilever. “We will not sacrifice our margins and market share.”
The food corporations don’t seem to be making these profits off the back of the retailers. UK supermarket Tesco reports profits up 12.3% from last year, a record rise. Other major retailers, such as France’s Carrefour and the US’s Wal-Mart, say that food sales are the main factor sustaining their profit increases. Wal-Mart’s Mexican division, Wilmer, which handles a third of overall food sales in Mexico, reported an 11% increase in profits for the first quarter of 2008. (At the same time Mexicans are demonstrating in the streets because they can no longer afford to make tortillas.) It seems that nearly every corporate player in the global food chain is making a killing from the food crisis. The seed and agrochemical companies are doing well too. Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, reported a 44% increase in overall profits in 2007. DuPont, the second-largest, said that its 2007 profits from seeds increased by 19%, while Signet, the top pesticide manufacturer and third largest company for seeds, saw profits rise 28% in the first quarter of 2008. Such record profits have nothing to do with any new value that these corporations are creating and they are not one-off windfalls from a sudden shift in supply and demand. Instead, they are a reflection of the extreme power that these middlemen have accrued through the globalization of the grain supply system. Intimately involved with the shaping of the grain trade rules that govern today’s grain supply system, tightly in control of markets, and the ever more complex financial systems through which global trade operates, these companies are in perfect position to turn grain scarcity into immense profits. The fact remains, “People Have to Eat, Whatever the Cost”.
Current Situation
The global food crisis intensified as Kazakhstan, one of the world’s biggest wheat exporters ban the export and rice prices shot up to a record high after Indonesia ban the export.
In another sign of grain crisis, a big food company in Japan, Nihon Shokuhin Kako, said high corn prices had forced it to buy cheaper genetically modified corn for the first time, breaking a social, though not legal, taboo, and signaling that opposition to genetically modified foods could weaken in the face of record grain prices.
Meanwhile, fresh wheat export ban in Kazakhstan, the world’s fifth largest exporter, and the rice export bans in Indonesia, threaten to trigger bans in other grain exporting countries, which will now face much higher demand from importing countries.
Hussein Allidina, at Morgan Stanley in New York, said pressure for export bans was likely to increase elsewhere as developing countries suffering high inflation tried to combat rising local prices by cutting back on exports of agriculture commodities.
The first arises from the fact that prices for commodities, including oil as well as most agricultural commodities, are typically quoted in US$....In substantive terms, the increase in US$ commodity prices is a big problem for the many Asian economies that have pursued their currencies peg to the US$ as a means of maintaining export competitiveness. The adverse impact on domestic consumers is now becoming obvious, and the only solution is to abandon the dollar peg and allow an appreciation. China is already moving in this direction.
A second important point is the impact of demand from the biofuel sector, particularly for corn in the US. The idea of making biofuels from food crops was always problematic. As the biofuel is long term government mandated program, and changing biofuel source from food crop to grass grown on marginal or non-arable land does not appear to be a short term viable solutions.
Finally, the biggest increases have been in wheat prices, reflecting the drought in Australia and in some other wheat producing countries. It seems likely, though it’s still impossible to prove, that human-induced climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of environmental issues i.e. draught. As such, it’s important not to regard climate change as a problem for the future. The fact remains, adverse effects are already here.
Grain Exporter Market
Corn:
Of the over 190 countries in the world, only a very few export corn. The other impression is how little of world-wide corn production is exported.
Top Corn Exporters
1. United States
2. Argentina
3. China
4. Brazil
5. South Africa
6. Hungary
7. Ukraine
The top three corn exporting countries account for 88 percent of the world's corn export. The United States held the largest share, marketing 62 percent of all corn exports.
Overall, the international corn export market has a structure more consistent with an oligopoly than a perfectly competitive market. Such indicators as the United States' serving as both the price leader and the residual supplier would be a natural expectation from this type of market structure.
Soybean:
Soybeans are the most imported agricultural commodity in the world both in terms of value and quantity.
United States leads the world in soybean production, with Second-place Brazil, followed by Argentina.
Top Soybean Exporters
1. Brazil
2. United States
3. Argentina
The top three soybean exporting countries account for 90 percent of the world's soybean export. The United States alone digest 40 percent of all corn exports.
Wheat:
The International Grain Council estimates that world wheat production will drop 7 million from last season to 607 million tons for the 2007-8 season. This represents a 3.2% decline from the global harvest of 626.5 million tons just two seasons ago.
While world wheat reserves are the lowest in 25 years, demand for grain remains robust. Economists caution that scarcer wheat will push up food prices and accelerate inflation. That scenario seems increasingly likely, as wheat futures hit a high of $7.59 this month on the Chicago Board of Trade. This represents a price increase of more than 50% in less than 3 months.
Top Ten Wheat Producers
1. China
2. India
3. United States
4. Russia
5. France
6. Canada
7. Australia
8. Germany
9. Pakistan
10. Turkey
The top 10 producers accounted for over two-thirds of global wheat harvests.
Top Wheat Exporters
1. United States
2. Australia
3. Canada
4. France
5. Argentina
6. Russia
7. Germany
8. United Kingdom
9. Kazakhstan
10. India
The top ten wheat exporting countries account for 80 percent of the world's soybean export. The United States held the largest share, marketing 30 percent of all wheat exports.
Food, Strategic Commodity
In an normal economic environment, demand for goods and services decreases if prices become too high. Buyers of U.S. grains (corn, soybeans and wheat) seem to be ignoring this economic principle as the U.S.'s grain stocks inventories are reaching critically low levels.
With global demand for grain at record levels and a weak U.S. dollar, foreign buyers are outbidding domestic buyers for American grains. While the higher agricultural commodity prices are good for crop agriculture, there are disconcerting downsides.
Global food consumers are going to have to pay more. U.S. ended 2007 with monthly inflation rate on food nearly 5% higher. It is estimated that the food inflation rate might be as much as 6% in 2008.
Also, discussions about food security in 2008 may become a paramount global issue as the discussions would address whether U.S. should allow the foreign sector to buy U.S.’s food. The main objective of the discussion would appear to be “Is food a strategic item that U.S. needs to keep in the U.S.?
For some U.S. crops, it's almost too late. The 2007 U.S. wheat crop is virtually sold out, while domestic soybean stocks soon will fall below a 20-day supply. Corn inventories are stronger, but with demand from export markets, the livestock industry, and ethanol plants, supplies also could be just as scarce for the 2008 crop. The condition could become more serious if adverse weather trims U.S. crop yields this summer and fall.
The situation is reminiscent of another run on U.S. grain one generation ago, and this is a very rare circumstance. The last time U.S. had this kind of uncertainty on food supplies was the early 1970s when the former Soviet Union became a major buyer of wheat in the U.S. In the fall of 1972 they were such aggressive buyers that they essentially bought the pantry out of U.S.’s available wheat supplies.
In 1973 U.S. also virtually ran out of soybeans. The U.S. Congress and president responded by saying U.S. cannot let the rest of the world have our strategic food supply, so they embargoed all foreign soybean shipments until U.S. could replenish the supply.
A similar export prohibition is not expected to occur this year, however, grain prices will have to keep climbing to slow the buying frenzy.
Despite the higher prices, wheat exports are 32% higher than one year ago; 33% of the U.S. soybean crop will be exported and corn exports this year are on pace to break the 1979-1980 record of 2.4 billion bushels.
For the grain importing countries, relationship of the U.S. dollar to importing country’s currencies exchange rate plays important role as the trading is based on U.S. dollar.
We've seen the relationship of the U.S. dollar to foreign currencies change substantially in the last few years. The European euro has increased in value relative to the U.S. dollar by 40%, this had resulted the increase of purchasing power by 40%. If importing country’s currency weakens, the situation is opposite i.e the purchasing power decreases, buy less for same amount of currency.
It might take another month of grain price increases to get users to cut back, and it is estimated that the soybean prices could top $15/bu. before all is said and done.
Farmland values and cash-rental rates should continue rising as producers look to expand their crop acreage to meet the grain demand. It is also expected that agribusinesses – especially those that offer seed, agrichemicals, fertilizer, machinery and financial capital – to benefit.
The challenge to satisfy the world's hunger for grain promises to make for an interesting year for 2008.
There is no doubt that the food is a security issue for every country of the world. World agriculture has been so productive in the past 60 years that general food shortages have been rare. With this long period of abundant food supplies, most of the world's consumers in developed countries have forgotten food's strategic nature. Given the world's appetite for basic crops, the hope for 2008 is for favorable yields throughout the globe that will give consumers and crop producers more time to adjust to this new high-demand era.
Conclusion
To the matter of facts, based on current grain market environments, the most viable/reliable grain export country without any doubt is defacto UNITED STATE of AMERICA. In addition to crude oil price increase, the grain price increase may dictate country’s economic growth, at least in near term until the grain price become under control. Under this circumstances, in order to sustain economic growth rates, a country must maintain stable Socio-Political-Economic environments in order to maintain the currency strength, inflation under control, and prevent rise of interest rate. Below a exapmle of a chart that explains economic impact a country may suffer if fail to do so.
Unstable Socio-Political-Economic situation would yield below economic conditions
(i.e. continued demonstration for unreasonable demand for the government policy and/or Korean government is force to re-negotiate the beef treaty and antagonize foremost trade partner US)
Overview
Thursday, June 19, 2008
My Opinion Article on the American Beef Issue in Korea
한국 내 쇠고기 광우병파동을 멀리 미국 에서 객관적인 입장으로 지켜보면서 필자는 참담한 마음을 금할 수 없습니다. 미국에서 살면서 수십 년간 갈비, 스테이크, 햄버거, 쏘세지, 사골국, 해장국 등을 먹어 오면서도 건강하게 잘 살고 있는 필자나 가족들 그리고 대대손손 미국에서 미국산 쇠고기를 주식으로 먹으며 살았던 많은 미국인들을 생각해 볼 때 미친 미국소를 외치며, 쇠고기 재협상 을 요구하는 데모를 하는 모습을 보면서 찹찹하기가 그지없습니다.
광우병과 재협상 구호를 외치며 거리로 뛰쳐나가는 사람들을 보노라면 겉으로는 “국민의 생명과 건강”을 내걸고 있지만, 그들이 주장하는 내용들은 너무나 극단적이고 객관적인 내용이 별로 없는 것 같습니다. 한국 내에서 건강에 대해서 관심이 높아지면서 건강문제가 의외로 민감해 질 수 잇다는 것은 이해하지만 부정적인 면이 부각되는 데 비해서 미국과 미국산 쇠고기 수입국의 인구 수억 명 중에 광우병으로 죽은 사람이 한 명도 없었다는 사실들을 애써 부정하고 있습니다.
한국 내에서 담배로 인하여 수많은 청소년들이 피해를 보지만, 누구하나 이번과 같이 국민건강을 위해서 담배에 의한 국민건강을 위협받는다는 것을 내세워 거리로 뛰쳐나가는 일이 없었습니다. 담배피우는 것을 멋으로 알다가 폐암으로 죽어가는 사람들이 수없이 많지만, 담배를 피우지 말자고 데모하는 일은 본 적이 없습니다. 담배피우고 죽을 확률이 광우병으로 죽을 확률보다 수백만 배 높다는 것은 객관적인 사실입니다.
또한, 대한민국 심장부에서, 중국인들이 자국의 국기를 휘두르며, 불법으로 대한민국의 국가 및 한국국민 전체를 모독하는 행동을 보여도 거리로 지금처럼 많은 사람들이 뛰쳐나가지 않았습니다.
미국기준으로 애완견 사료의 기준에도 못 미치는 오염된 환경에서 재배되어 생산된 일부 중국산 식품 및 식재료에 대해서는 외면하다시피 하면서도 수억 명이 넘는 사람들이 매일 식탁에서 먹고 있으며, 과학적인 조사를 통하여 지난 10년 동안 단 한명도 죽은 사람이 없는 광우병에 대해서 “미국산 쇠고기 = 광우병 쇠고기”라고 물고 늘어지는 것은 누가 보더라도 공평하지 못하고 비이성적이며 비합리적이라고 생각할 수밖에 없습니다.
어떤 이슈이든지, 민중운동과 시민운동이 객관적으로 지지를 받으려면 감정적인 잣대가 사라져야 지지를 받을 수 있습니다. 똑같은 인간의 마음을 가지고 있으면서 A에 대해서는 격정적인 반응을 보이고 유사한 B에 대해서는 외면이나 동정의 마음을 가지는 이중성을 버릴 때, 비로서 그 객관성을 인정을 받을 수 있다고 생각합니다.
대장균이 있다는 중국산 김치, 다른 나라에선 애완동물의 사료조건에도 못 미치는 일부 중국산 식재료로 만들어 국민 건강을 크게 위협하는 음식을 매일 사먹으면서 아무런 저항감을 느끼지 못하면서, “미국산 쇠고기 = 광우병 쇠고기”로의 사회분위기를 이끌어가는 것이 과연 이성적인지를 의심해볼 여지가 있습니다.
일부 단체가 주장하는 내용에는 미국소는 동물성 사료를 먹이기 때문에 광우병 발생 위험이 있다는 내용이 있지만, 그런 면에서 비슷한 동물사료를 미국에서 수입하여 사료로 사용하는 한우나 젖소의 경우도 유사한 문제가 발생할 수 있다는 것에 대해서는 완전하게 외면되고 있습니다. 또한 한국 내 도살장의 환경, 검역 시스템 등 도축, 유통면에서 미국소와 한국소를 객관적으로 비교해볼 때 어느 쪽이 더 문제가 있는지에 대해서도 추정해볼 수 있지만 이러한 사실들도 외면되고 있습니다. 그러한 호도된 진실들 때문에 값싸고 질이 좋은 미국소가 들어오는 것에 대하여 두려움을 가지고 있는 것은 아닌가 생각되며, 이러한 두려움이 수단과 방법을 가리지 않고 미국산 쇠고기 수입을 막아 광우병 위협으로부터 스스로를 지키려는 자기보호의 본능으로 나타난 것이 아닌가 생각됩니다.
미국은 쇠고기가 주식입니다. 미국은 음식물에 대하여 높은 기준의 검역시스템을 가지고 있으며, 더구나 고소와 고발이 빈발하는 나라입니다. 만약 쇠고기를 먹고서 광우병이 걸렸다 하면 수천 억 달러의 고발사건이 발생하는 나라가 바로 미국입니다. 평생 동안 자기가 실컷 담배를 피우고서는 폐암에 걸렸다고 담배회사를 상대로 고발하는 사람들이 미국인입니다. 어떻게 보면 고발과 고소를 하는 것을 당연하게 생각하는 분위기의 나라입니다. 그렇기 때문에 미국에서 수입된 쇠고기로 인하여 문제가 발생할 경우 WTO 비준에 의거하여 수출업체에게 책임소지를 물을 수 있는 국제분쟁이 가능한 현실 입니다. 국내 분쟁과 국제 분쟁에 대하여 철저한 훈련을 쌓아온 미국사람들의 의식 속에 광우병이 걸릴 수 있는 우려가 있는 소들만 골라서 한국 사람에게 팔아먹을 것이라는 것은 상상할 수 없는 것이며, 이 근거 없는 “미국인 악자론“의 유포는 선동적인 유언비어를 퍼뜨리는 정치적 운동이라고 밖에 볼 수 없으니, 우리의 순수한 어린 자녀들이 정치적으로 이용을 당하고 있는 것으로 보여 집니다.
우리나라 사람들은 대단히 다이내믹하고 도전심이 강하지만, 이러한 점 때문에 과학적이며 객관적인 사실들을 사전에 꼼꼼하게 확인하지 않고서도 일시적인 감정이나 단편적인 사실만으로 재구성하여 상식화 할 수 있는 감성이 있다는 생각이듭니다. 따라서 이러한 운동은 원래의 취지보다는 국민의 감성적 특성을 이용하여 ”국민의 생명과 건강”의 가면을 쓰고, 국가의 안정을 볼모로 개인적인 밥그릇을 챙기려는 일부 세력들의 거의 반국가적인 행동으로 보입니다.
수출과 수입은 비지니스입니다. 최고의 상품을 많이 팔아서 최고의 이윤을 추구하는 것이 비지니스의 논리이며 그러한 논리로 자본주의를 구축하여 부를 축적하고 있는 나라가 미국입니다. 미국에서 먹지 않는 미친 소, 죽은 소, 병든 소의 고기 및 내장을 팔아서 돈을 벌겠다고 몰아가는 것은 거의 억지 수준에 불과 합니다. 그리고 국제분쟁이 일어나고 고발이 되는 상황에 이르면 모든 수출이 정지됨과 동시에, 수출대금을 회수하지 못하는 일이 벌어짐은 물론 손해배상까지 책임져야하는데 어느 기업이 그런 상식적으로 용납이 안 되는 행동을 하겠습니까?
미국기업 Johnson &Johnson 사가 유명한 진통제인 타이로놀을 만들어서 판매하고 있으며 대한민국에도 수입이 되어서 많은 사람들이 먹고 있습니다. 그런데 시판한지 얼마 안 되어 생산 공정 중에 타이로놀에 이물질을 주입한 문제가 터져 나왔습니다. 또 그 이물질이 어디에 들어 있는지 파악하지 못하는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 공장을 정지할 것인가 모든 물건을 회수할 것인가를 선택해야 하는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 3일간을 정지하면 수억 달러의 손해가 벌어지는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 그때 Johnson &Johnson사는 공장을 3일간 닫고 이미 출시된 약들을 전부 리콜하였습니다. 그리고 수억 달러의 손해를 입었지만 소비자들로 부터 신뢰를 얻어서 타이로놀은 오늘날 미국의 필수상비약으로 자리매김을 하고 있습니다.
이와 같이, 미국의 기업들은 자본주의 이념아래 인류, 사회, 환경에 대한 책임의식을 고취하는 것을 모토로 기업을 경영 하고 있습니다. 나아가서 철저한 자본주의의 미국기업들이 광우병이 걸린 미친 소와 병든 소의 쇠고기를 한국에 팔아서 무슨 이익이 있을 것인지에 대해서 생각해보면 금방 이해를 할 수 있습니다. 그런데 이런 상식을 받아들이지 못하는 것은 바로 “미국놈들이 돈에 눈이 멀어서 한국에 광우병 쇠고기를 팔려한다”는 미국악자론에 사로잡힌 반미주의자들의 이데올로기에 불과합니다.
바로 지금, 대한민국 경제는 심각한 위기로 빠져들 형국에 놓여 있습니다 (이하 그림 참조). 경제의 70%를 수출에 의존하는 대한민국에, 주요 수출국인 미국이 당장에 불공정무역이라는 이름으로 한국 수출 품목에 고관세를 부여하면 도산을 할 기업들이 한국에 줄을 서고 있으며, 이것이 현실화 될 경우에는, 경쟁 국가들인 일본, 타이완 및 중국 기업들만 횡재를 맞는 것은 물론, 대한민국은 회복이 힘든 장기불황의 늪을 헤매게 될 것입니다. 더 나아가 대한민국 국민의 주식인 곡물(옥수수, 콩, 밀)의 주수입원인 미국의 뺨을 때리는 것이 되며, 걷잡을 수 없는 곡물 수입가 인상은 소비자 물가 상승으로 이어지며 장기적인 경기 침체로 이어질 수도 있을 것입니다. 세계의 법이 한국에서 무시 되어서는 안 되며, 모든 국민의 행동은 국가의 장기적인 이익추구에 도움이 될 수 있도록 신중 하여야 할 것입니다.
자유는 권리가 아닌 특혜입니다. 진정한 민주주의는 자유라는 특혜를 존중하는 환경하에서만 유지가 가능하며, 특혜를 마치 권리인양 오판하여 남용하면 특혜는 빼았기게 될 것입니다.
황선재 (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan)
君子見幾而作 不俟終日
(군자는 낌새만 보고 방비를 하지만 소인은 소잃고 난 뒤에야 외앙간을 고친다)
광우병과 재협상 구호를 외치며 거리로 뛰쳐나가는 사람들을 보노라면 겉으로는 “국민의 생명과 건강”을 내걸고 있지만, 그들이 주장하는 내용들은 너무나 극단적이고 객관적인 내용이 별로 없는 것 같습니다. 한국 내에서 건강에 대해서 관심이 높아지면서 건강문제가 의외로 민감해 질 수 잇다는 것은 이해하지만 부정적인 면이 부각되는 데 비해서 미국과 미국산 쇠고기 수입국의 인구 수억 명 중에 광우병으로 죽은 사람이 한 명도 없었다는 사실들을 애써 부정하고 있습니다.
한국 내에서 담배로 인하여 수많은 청소년들이 피해를 보지만, 누구하나 이번과 같이 국민건강을 위해서 담배에 의한 국민건강을 위협받는다는 것을 내세워 거리로 뛰쳐나가는 일이 없었습니다. 담배피우는 것을 멋으로 알다가 폐암으로 죽어가는 사람들이 수없이 많지만, 담배를 피우지 말자고 데모하는 일은 본 적이 없습니다. 담배피우고 죽을 확률이 광우병으로 죽을 확률보다 수백만 배 높다는 것은 객관적인 사실입니다.
또한, 대한민국 심장부에서, 중국인들이 자국의 국기를 휘두르며, 불법으로 대한민국의 국가 및 한국국민 전체를 모독하는 행동을 보여도 거리로 지금처럼 많은 사람들이 뛰쳐나가지 않았습니다.
미국기준으로 애완견 사료의 기준에도 못 미치는 오염된 환경에서 재배되어 생산된 일부 중국산 식품 및 식재료에 대해서는 외면하다시피 하면서도 수억 명이 넘는 사람들이 매일 식탁에서 먹고 있으며, 과학적인 조사를 통하여 지난 10년 동안 단 한명도 죽은 사람이 없는 광우병에 대해서 “미국산 쇠고기 = 광우병 쇠고기”라고 물고 늘어지는 것은 누가 보더라도 공평하지 못하고 비이성적이며 비합리적이라고 생각할 수밖에 없습니다.
어떤 이슈이든지, 민중운동과 시민운동이 객관적으로 지지를 받으려면 감정적인 잣대가 사라져야 지지를 받을 수 있습니다. 똑같은 인간의 마음을 가지고 있으면서 A에 대해서는 격정적인 반응을 보이고 유사한 B에 대해서는 외면이나 동정의 마음을 가지는 이중성을 버릴 때, 비로서 그 객관성을 인정을 받을 수 있다고 생각합니다.
대장균이 있다는 중국산 김치, 다른 나라에선 애완동물의 사료조건에도 못 미치는 일부 중국산 식재료로 만들어 국민 건강을 크게 위협하는 음식을 매일 사먹으면서 아무런 저항감을 느끼지 못하면서, “미국산 쇠고기 = 광우병 쇠고기”로의 사회분위기를 이끌어가는 것이 과연 이성적인지를 의심해볼 여지가 있습니다.
일부 단체가 주장하는 내용에는 미국소는 동물성 사료를 먹이기 때문에 광우병 발생 위험이 있다는 내용이 있지만, 그런 면에서 비슷한 동물사료를 미국에서 수입하여 사료로 사용하는 한우나 젖소의 경우도 유사한 문제가 발생할 수 있다는 것에 대해서는 완전하게 외면되고 있습니다. 또한 한국 내 도살장의 환경, 검역 시스템 등 도축, 유통면에서 미국소와 한국소를 객관적으로 비교해볼 때 어느 쪽이 더 문제가 있는지에 대해서도 추정해볼 수 있지만 이러한 사실들도 외면되고 있습니다. 그러한 호도된 진실들 때문에 값싸고 질이 좋은 미국소가 들어오는 것에 대하여 두려움을 가지고 있는 것은 아닌가 생각되며, 이러한 두려움이 수단과 방법을 가리지 않고 미국산 쇠고기 수입을 막아 광우병 위협으로부터 스스로를 지키려는 자기보호의 본능으로 나타난 것이 아닌가 생각됩니다.
미국은 쇠고기가 주식입니다. 미국은 음식물에 대하여 높은 기준의 검역시스템을 가지고 있으며, 더구나 고소와 고발이 빈발하는 나라입니다. 만약 쇠고기를 먹고서 광우병이 걸렸다 하면 수천 억 달러의 고발사건이 발생하는 나라가 바로 미국입니다. 평생 동안 자기가 실컷 담배를 피우고서는 폐암에 걸렸다고 담배회사를 상대로 고발하는 사람들이 미국인입니다. 어떻게 보면 고발과 고소를 하는 것을 당연하게 생각하는 분위기의 나라입니다. 그렇기 때문에 미국에서 수입된 쇠고기로 인하여 문제가 발생할 경우 WTO 비준에 의거하여 수출업체에게 책임소지를 물을 수 있는 국제분쟁이 가능한 현실 입니다. 국내 분쟁과 국제 분쟁에 대하여 철저한 훈련을 쌓아온 미국사람들의 의식 속에 광우병이 걸릴 수 있는 우려가 있는 소들만 골라서 한국 사람에게 팔아먹을 것이라는 것은 상상할 수 없는 것이며, 이 근거 없는 “미국인 악자론“의 유포는 선동적인 유언비어를 퍼뜨리는 정치적 운동이라고 밖에 볼 수 없으니, 우리의 순수한 어린 자녀들이 정치적으로 이용을 당하고 있는 것으로 보여 집니다.
우리나라 사람들은 대단히 다이내믹하고 도전심이 강하지만, 이러한 점 때문에 과학적이며 객관적인 사실들을 사전에 꼼꼼하게 확인하지 않고서도 일시적인 감정이나 단편적인 사실만으로 재구성하여 상식화 할 수 있는 감성이 있다는 생각이듭니다. 따라서 이러한 운동은 원래의 취지보다는 국민의 감성적 특성을 이용하여 ”국민의 생명과 건강”의 가면을 쓰고, 국가의 안정을 볼모로 개인적인 밥그릇을 챙기려는 일부 세력들의 거의 반국가적인 행동으로 보입니다.
수출과 수입은 비지니스입니다. 최고의 상품을 많이 팔아서 최고의 이윤을 추구하는 것이 비지니스의 논리이며 그러한 논리로 자본주의를 구축하여 부를 축적하고 있는 나라가 미국입니다. 미국에서 먹지 않는 미친 소, 죽은 소, 병든 소의 고기 및 내장을 팔아서 돈을 벌겠다고 몰아가는 것은 거의 억지 수준에 불과 합니다. 그리고 국제분쟁이 일어나고 고발이 되는 상황에 이르면 모든 수출이 정지됨과 동시에, 수출대금을 회수하지 못하는 일이 벌어짐은 물론 손해배상까지 책임져야하는데 어느 기업이 그런 상식적으로 용납이 안 되는 행동을 하겠습니까?
미국기업 Johnson &Johnson 사가 유명한 진통제인 타이로놀을 만들어서 판매하고 있으며 대한민국에도 수입이 되어서 많은 사람들이 먹고 있습니다. 그런데 시판한지 얼마 안 되어 생산 공정 중에 타이로놀에 이물질을 주입한 문제가 터져 나왔습니다. 또 그 이물질이 어디에 들어 있는지 파악하지 못하는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 공장을 정지할 것인가 모든 물건을 회수할 것인가를 선택해야 하는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 3일간을 정지하면 수억 달러의 손해가 벌어지는 상황이 벌어졌습니다. 그때 Johnson &Johnson사는 공장을 3일간 닫고 이미 출시된 약들을 전부 리콜하였습니다. 그리고 수억 달러의 손해를 입었지만 소비자들로 부터 신뢰를 얻어서 타이로놀은 오늘날 미국의 필수상비약으로 자리매김을 하고 있습니다.
이와 같이, 미국의 기업들은 자본주의 이념아래 인류, 사회, 환경에 대한 책임의식을 고취하는 것을 모토로 기업을 경영 하고 있습니다. 나아가서 철저한 자본주의의 미국기업들이 광우병이 걸린 미친 소와 병든 소의 쇠고기를 한국에 팔아서 무슨 이익이 있을 것인지에 대해서 생각해보면 금방 이해를 할 수 있습니다. 그런데 이런 상식을 받아들이지 못하는 것은 바로 “미국놈들이 돈에 눈이 멀어서 한국에 광우병 쇠고기를 팔려한다”는 미국악자론에 사로잡힌 반미주의자들의 이데올로기에 불과합니다.
바로 지금, 대한민국 경제는 심각한 위기로 빠져들 형국에 놓여 있습니다 (이하 그림 참조). 경제의 70%를 수출에 의존하는 대한민국에, 주요 수출국인 미국이 당장에 불공정무역이라는 이름으로 한국 수출 품목에 고관세를 부여하면 도산을 할 기업들이 한국에 줄을 서고 있으며, 이것이 현실화 될 경우에는, 경쟁 국가들인 일본, 타이완 및 중국 기업들만 횡재를 맞는 것은 물론, 대한민국은 회복이 힘든 장기불황의 늪을 헤매게 될 것입니다. 더 나아가 대한민국 국민의 주식인 곡물(옥수수, 콩, 밀)의 주수입원인 미국의 뺨을 때리는 것이 되며, 걷잡을 수 없는 곡물 수입가 인상은 소비자 물가 상승으로 이어지며 장기적인 경기 침체로 이어질 수도 있을 것입니다. 세계의 법이 한국에서 무시 되어서는 안 되며, 모든 국민의 행동은 국가의 장기적인 이익추구에 도움이 될 수 있도록 신중 하여야 할 것입니다.
자유는 권리가 아닌 특혜입니다. 진정한 민주주의는 자유라는 특혜를 존중하는 환경하에서만 유지가 가능하며, 특혜를 마치 권리인양 오판하여 남용하면 특혜는 빼았기게 될 것입니다.
황선재 (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan)
君子見幾而作 不俟終日
(군자는 낌새만 보고 방비를 하지만 소인은 소잃고 난 뒤에야 외앙간을 고친다)
Welcome
Welcome to my new blog. Visit here for weekly updates, including interesting facts, pictures, or music that I happen to come across and would like to share.
Please feel free to leave comments at the bottom of each post as I would like to hear some feedback on what you think.
Thanks and enjoy these videos!
Please feel free to leave comments at the bottom of each post as I would like to hear some feedback on what you think.
Thanks and enjoy these videos!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)