Talk:Subsidy/Archives/2012

Controversy

I added this section. I felt it was a side of subsidies worth mentioning. Though maybe it would have better tied in with the Trade barrier article or some such. It's pretty much just a stub anyway, so edit, move or merge mercilesly as needed. --Sherool 21:30, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is great to see that you took the initiative in fleshing out the article. The main problem with the addition is what it doesn't say: Of course, the trade barriers controversy is only one of many disputes regarding subsidies, and agricultural subsidies are only one (significant, though) part of many forms of subsidies, even only considering those that affect foreign trade (e.g. steel, airplanes). Rl 06:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I seem to remember the standard definition of a subsidy (I think this what you'd find in the Palgrave Dictionary of Economics) was something like a transfer of resources from the public to the private sector that changes market prices (no change in prices and it's just a common and garden transfer). --Nmcmurdo 22:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Subsidies to help the poor

Something to work on - a section on government subsidies to help the poor. Some may be more relevant to Welfare (financial aid)

Key points:

• May not be effective - World Bank Report: Water Utility Subsidies Benefit The ‘Haves’, Not The ‘Have Nots’
• May provide disincentives to immediate action (better to wait for a subsidy) and have other negative effects. There may be more effective ways to issue of motivation. See Kamal Kar (article under construction - will be much better in a week or two).
• May encourage pollution, discourage economizing, distort the market, and create a financial burdern for the government. (Pollution is particularly relevant to fuel subsidies, in countries including Indonesia, though President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has reduced the subsidy now.)
• Removal of subsidies and/or public services has resulted from pressure from the IMF and World Bank. This has been strongly criticized by (NGO's? activists?) (Should refer here to studies... I suspect that the removal is often good in theory but badly implemented.)
• Welfare can have negative impacts, including dependency. (Note Aboriginal activist Noel Pearson's views on this).
• I don't know if this idea has been developed anywhere: Tony Abbott proposed that rather than set a minimum wage, the government could supplement the hourly rate paid by employers. Removal of the minimimum wage would (it is claimed) reduce the disincentive against hiring workers. (Controversial idea, to put it mildly. I should point out that having a negative opinion of Tony Abbott - as I do - is not a good enough reason to reject this idea.)
• May not be economically sustainable.--71.245.164.83 (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to edit the above - maybe it can get to the point of insertion into the article. I probably come across a right-winger here, which isn't the whole story at all - anyway, the main thing is to present the views, and most importantly the facts. --Singkong2005 05:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

external links

Links to specific articles giving a position of the effect of subsidies in specific situation are not acceptable external links, per WP:EL. I removed them. If any of them are from a good 3rd party reliable source, they can possibly be used as references. DGG (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Dead link

Why does the red link, cross subsidy still exist when that page was deleted three times multiple years ago? It's in the see also section, where red links should not be. Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC) booga booga —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.59.148.200 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)