User Comments

1. 

   6/07/09

   Floormodel

   Prior to the original agreement, the global coffee market was prone to wild swings in price, with overproduction often drastically affecting the income of major exporters of coffee. In previous years, organizations such as the National Coffee Association had opposed such agreements on the grounds that they infringed upon free trade (and likely resulted in a higher prices for consumers).
   
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   the above is from your link.
   
   I lost valuable coffee from snickering when I read "National Coffee Association had opposed such agreements on the GROUNDS"
   
   this means I've either had too little coffee or too much.
   Back to reading your link now.

   [reply]
   1. 

      6/07/09

      Agit8r

      lol... completely without grounds. *snicker*
   2. 

      6/07/09

      Floormodel

      made me wonder if they filter their information.
   3. 

      6/07/09

      Agit8r

      perhaps they have another agreement percolating
   4. 

      6/07/09

      legbamel

      Floormodel, there is no such thing as too much coffee. Have another cup.
      
      I'm sure they've got something else brewing.
   5. 

      6/07/09

      Floormodel

      only if they espresso themselves.
2. 

   6/07/09

   legbamel

   As much as I'd like to believe that a political conscience will lead people to "vote" for free trade coffee with their purchases, the price difference and a lack of knowledge on the subject generally leads folks to choose the less-expensive option. It's like using wind energy from your electric company - you have to pay for the privilege of being a good global citizen and many people can't or won't.

   [reply]
   1. 

      6/07/09

      Agit8r

      Fair Trade and this international agreement via the UN that I listed are two different things. This is something that the U.S. is a signitory to anyway. It would however disporportionately be to our advantage (compared to, say, Europe) to up the price accepted by the consuming nations, because some of the coffee producing nations are sources of illegal immigration to the U.S.
3. 

   6/07/09

   rfburnhertz

   It is not the responsibility of a business to improve some person or some groups lot in life.
   
   However, it is not acceptable for a business to exploit individuals or groups in what they pay for a product simply because that individual or group may live in and operate out of a nation which makes their situation somewhat desperate in what they are willing to sell their product for.
   
   If all things are equal in the quality of the product, the price paid by the buyer to the seller should be relatively the same.
   
   legbamel.
   It's a privilege to be a 'global citizen' and I have to pay for that privilege?
   I've no interest in being a global citizen.
   How do I opt out?

   [reply]
   1. 

      6/07/09

      polybore

      Go to Mars if you want to opt out. Otherwise like it or lump it.
   2. 

      6/08/09

      legbamel

      You're a global citizen whether you act with consideration for the impact of your choices or not. The problem is that you often have to pay more for making the socially responsible choices. There are only so many issues you can take on yourself, unless you're independently wealthy on the Paris Hilton scale, meaning that you have the time and money to research all of the issues around every grocery purchase, much less the source of the wood in your furniture and the plaster in your walls. Coffee just happens to be an easily-researched and -understood concern, as well as on in which better choices are readily available.
4. 

   6/07/09

   Epicharis

   Absolutely. There ought to be responsibilities that go with the benefits of globalisation. It is far too easy for wealthy nations to oppress and exploit producers (of various products) in poorer nations and it is outrageous. If these people were Americans or Western Europeans no one would stand for it, but because they are brown and foreign it's apparently acceptable.

   [reply]
   1. 

      6/08/09

      legbamel

      Well, they're poor and likely have no Internet access, at any rate.