rice inflation?

marduk

Sarnie Clown!
The article below from the NY Times should give a clear picture on what's going on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/business...;pagewanted=all

The gist of it though, comes from this:

"Several factors are contributing to the steep rice in prices. Rising affluence in India and China has increased demand. At the same time, drought and other bad weather have reduced output in Australia and elsewhere. Many rice farmers are turning to more lucrative cash crops, reducing the amount of land devoted to the grain. And urbanization and industrialization have cut into the land devoted to rice cultivation."

Cambodia isn't holding back exports because of elections. It decided to cut its exportation of rice down because they want to keep the price of rice low in their country. Thus, if they export less, there should be more rice in their country which will help with the worldwide shortage.

The people who have been hit hardest by this though are Africans. Thus, if you can, skip out on the rice and eat something else.

One more thing, they forgot two other factors from the above article. First is that the high price of oil makes everything more expensive. To cultivate rice, there might be machineries that would require the use of fuel. With prices going up, that trickles down to the value of rice itself. Also, the lower value of the American dollar also mean that rice commodity trade at a much higher price than what it would usually go for.

So yeah...higher price of food commodities, budgetary cuts for education (at least in cali), state deficits all across the board, and only 70% (and that's a high estimate) of high school kids are graduating despite the "awesome" No Child Left Behind Policy. All of this and the cost of the Iraq War is approaching $510 BILLION DOLLARS. California has a state deficit of $16 Billion.

So don't you think the cost of Iraq could go towards something else?
 

Mister Bubbub

sarNie Egg
The article below from the NY Times should give a clear picture on what's going on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/business...;pagewanted=all

Cambodia isn't holding back exports because of elections. It decided to cut its exportation of rice down because they want to keep the price of rice low in their country. Thus, if they export less, there should be more rice in their country which will help with the worldwide shortage.
According to the New York Times article it states, "The government hoped that keeping more rice inside the country would hold down prices," not Cambodia (possible that it could be implied). Also, the NY Times states, "Cambodia banned all rice exports except by government agencies," and this is what I'm curious about with the 'government agencies' juicing up the money with the high prices (and according to the several Asian store owners [SK market, NC Store, there's this other one I can't remember the name of atm] who associate with the import of rice from Thailand says, that it was due to the elections. That's what I based my post on, and the NY Times also supported my statement by stating, "Thai exporters have already practically stopped signing delivery contracts, Mr. Savage said.") Also, the NY Times only stated the worldwide "epidemic" about rice crops shortages and what each country is trying reducing exports, and didn't specifically state anything that has to do with Cambodia, just that it "banned all rice exports." Also, people from around here are speaking about what I've mentioned as well. Discussions about this will probably be heighten during Cambodian's New Year this weekend. So, I'll probably be more well informed when people from other places come here to discuss it.

Just billions? The US debt deficit have pass into the trillions a couple of years ago. It took only a couple of months for the soldiers to drop in on Iraq, but its taking forever for them to get back home. Yeah, our government is so 'rational' when they decided to avenge for 9/11 claiming reasons such as 'they are hiding weapons of mass destruction' that we've yet to find evidence for, right? /sarcasm/

Also, the next thing you know, there's going to be a shortage of loads of other stuff if this keeps happening. :\
 

marduk

Sarnie Clown!
According to the New York Times article it states, "The government hoped that keeping more rice inside the country would hold down prices," not Cambodia (possible that it could be implied). Also, the NY Times states, "Cambodia banned all rice exports except by government agencies," and this is what I'm curious about with the 'government agencies' juicing up the money with the high prices (and according to the several Asian store owners [SK market, NC Store, there's this other one I can't remember the name of atm] who associate with the import of rice from Thailand says, that it was due to the elections. That's what I based my post on, and the NY Times also supported my statement by stating, "Thai exporters have already practically stopped signing delivery contracts, Mr. Savage said.") Also, the NY Times only stated the worldwide "epidemic" about rice crops shortages and what each country is trying reducing exports, and didn't specifically state anything that has to do with Cambodia, just that it "banned all rice exports." Also, people from around here are speaking about what I've mentioned as well. Discussions about this will probably be heighten during Cambodian's New Year this weekend. So, I'll probably be more well informed when people from other places come here to discuss it.

Just billions? The US debt deficit have pass into the trillions a couple of years ago. It took only a couple of months for the soldiers to drop in on Iraq, but its taking forever for them to get back home. Yeah, our government is so 'rational' when they decided to avenge for 9/11 claiming reasons such as 'they are hiding weapons of mass destruction' that we've yet to find evidence for, right? /sarcasm/

Also, the next thing you know, there's going to be a shortage of loads of other stuff if this keeps happening. :\
You make some good points but maybe I'm reading your post incorrectly, but I don't quite exactly get what you're saying. Maybe you could clarify. My point was that Cambodia was pulling back on the export of their rice crops so that the prices of rice in their country would stay low. However, this would trigger an inflation of the price of rice to the rest of the world. I'm not sure if you're saying this, but Cambodia isn't trying to artificially increase the price of rice to the rest of the world. The article below can further explain this:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/28/business/rice.php

Countries like Thailand and Cambodia (as all countries) have a responsibility to their country first. So if there is a worldwide rice shortage, they should keep their rice crop for themselves then. In global perspective, this is selfish and will cause a worldwide inflation if many countries (like Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand) decide to limit exports of rice. But for them, it makes sense. After all, we should protect ourselves.

The actual value of rice is traded on a commodity market. It's pooled into the rest of the world's supply. So Cambodia by itself cannot really control the price of rice. It could make it a little worst, but it doesn't control it completely. But let's say it can just for hypothetical sake and say that its limit on rice exports cause a significant spike in the price of rice. This doesn't guarantee that the world's market will buy rice from Cambodia. Thus, it doesn't really have a motivation to withhold rice for the sake of increasing its price.

This is a side track and doesn't really have anything to do with what's being said here, but in contrast, people think OPEC is withholding oil for the sake of increasing its price though. The difference between the oil scenario and the Cambodia-rice scenario is that OPEC controls a large majority of oil production. So if the price of oil goes up, OPEC stands to gain quite a bit. Additionally, even though oil is also traded on a commodities market, since OPEC controls a large part of the world's oil, it stands to directly benefit from the higher prices, so in that situation, it would have motivation to do what I said. Additionally, it's also been suggested that OPEC takes the money it gained from oil sale and then reinvesting it in oil, thus increasing the price further by driving up demand. I don't know if that's true, since I'm sure it's highly illegal, but anything is possible with a corporate-like entity like OPEC. As for Cambodia, being a smaller player in the rice arena, it does not have such luxury as raising the rice price if it wants.

As for the U.S. debt deficit, I was not talking about that. I was talking about state deficits like California and how much of the money from Iraq can go towards balancing it. HOWEVER, you bring up a very good point. The U.S. debt is in the trillions and it would be nice to make up some grounds by using some of the money that was spent on Iraq on it.

This brings up another thing that bugs me though. During war time (say...Iraq), we were able to move some money around so that we could afford this war to the sum of $341.4 million dollars per day. Why then were we not able to do the same thing during non-war time and go towards balancing our financial books?
 

emo

sarNie Hatchling
I went to the Asian market to buy a bag of rice but the price was $40. I was shocked, I am so late about it.
 

Mister Bubbub

sarNie Egg
To clarify my post, I was referring to the price markets that are strictly towards the Asian super markets and specifically about the rice bags that most people (I'm assuming) that buy the rice crops that have the "Products of Thailand" on it. Because the person that started the post, and most, if not all of the people here are most likely consumers of the market I was talking about. The worldwide effect of this does not obtain only to just Thailand and Cambodia and I'm sure we can discuss it without no end (though I do find it interesting considering that I was reading about this going to be happening a while back too). Next time I'll be sure to mention what market and region as well as to what the target consumers are in my post to avoid confusion.

Also you can check out this topic: http://www.sarnworld.com/discuzz/index.php?showtopic=25448
They are discussing something similar to what I posted earlier.
 
Top