Warm greetings from Ukraine and thank you for being a reliable source of thoughtful, unbiased discussions about the topics most important to us! There is unimaginable levels of generational trauma in Ukrainians from centuries of imperialistic rule. Just last century 4+ millions were starved to death in 3 man-made famines (the 1932-1933 one named Holodomor for it's devastating ruin) organised by the Soviets. And now, to see our beautiful countryside plundered by russia again while facing a looming trading blockade from the West is too painful. I hope sense prevails and mutually beneficial agreements can be found, that respect us as equal participants.
@@avreliyfivas265 я чет не помню, чтобы у нас говорили «это искусственный голод устроенный Сталиным чтобы истребить нашу нацию». Мне кажется что украинская сторона гораздо больше сделала для того, чтобы это трагедия воспринималась как комедия.
It’s also a good reminder of the negative effect of well intended charity work and aid to poor countries. Sending food and clothes for free to poor people might be noble in intention but actually undercuts the cost of business for local producers who grow food/make stuff etc. They can’t compete with free so they lose out on business and end up as poor as everyone else around them, damaging the local economy even more long term.
Re: the Haitian rice story, I’ve heard of a similar story about Mexican maize post-NAFTA. Cheap, subsidized US corn flooded the market and upended farmers’ livelihoods. This economic havoc contributed to the early-2000’s economic migration of Mexicans into the US. American ag subsidies are no joke.
I was wondering if I should use the Mexican or Haitian example, and in the end decided to use the example of Haiti because I used the Mexican example before.
I actually studied this for my postgrad and there is a lot more nuance to the Mexico story than the Haitian one. Mexico has a problem with only a few families owning the best agricultural land and had for decades had protectionist agriculture policies, and as such didn’t invest in agriculture technology. On top of that just after NAFTA was signed there was a problem with a civil war in southern Mexico, and the peso crisis, and then the cartels.
That deal was still a net gain for mexico, but i agree that free trade should be FREE TRADE, with no unfair advantages of corpos colluding with the gov
Canadian here, A fun fact about the Canadian prairies is that when the Prairies were transferred from the jurisdiction of London to Ottawa, our Prime Minister at the time, Sir Wilfred Laurier promoted the immigration of many Ukrainian farmers to the Prairies where they would help bring their expertise in farming and experience to help develop the Prairies. Many of the poor peasants got land grants to homesteads across the west of Canada (which was a step up from their lives in the Russian/Austrian empires and later the Soviet Union) and it helped the population on the Praries boom.
Canada actually has one of the largest populations of ethnic Ukrainians in the world even now. I think we're 3rd place behind Ukraine itself and Russia. My great grandfather was born in Donetsk.
@@unlikelyhero3167 Bukovina for my own. Atleast I am pretty sure. Somewhere in Austrian Ukraine. For my family is pro central powers on my fathers side.
Hi, I'm Ukrainian. I have a few words. My uncle is a professional agronomist and I also know some farmers in personal. The story about very cheap Ukrainian food after EU membership is a little bit overestimated, mostly because of the current abnormal conditions in Ukrainian economy. Today Russian naval blockade of our ports is still a big deal. Ukraine doesn't have enough barns and elevators to store so much harvest for such a long time. That's why the last 2 years of war, UA farmers had to sell their products almost at cost price. Otherwise, their harvest will decay and you'll not have enough money for the next year sowing. Of course, it caused a huge impact on the Western market, as the only place where you can sell your products, but it mostly a consequence of war, and not just a "cheating advantage" of fertile soil. Also, it's important to mention that Ukrainian yield per hectare is much lower then, for instance, in the USA. Despite a very nice natural conditions, UA farming technologies are still not modern enough to give similar results. Relatively high Ukrainian agricultural numbers are mostly the consequence of the fact that Ukraine, after being imperial "bread-basket" for hundreds of years, today is the most plowed country on the Earth which caused a very bad impact on our ecology. Another big factor is a labor cost, which is currently lower than it will be after membership. If labor market of Ukraine will be opened to EU and vice versa, our employers will be forced to compete in salaries that will increase food cost.
Rest assured that every EU customer who once could buy a Liter of sunflower oil from Ukraine for less than 1€ and now has to pay at least 3€ for locally produced oil, welcomes a post-war Ukraine into the EU. Not everyone owns a farm but is more worried about their cost of living.
You obsolutely need fertilizers even when farming on chernozem. You are taking nutrients from soil, and while some are returned from mineralization and through rainfall, modern agriculture just cannot be sustained without them.
I also think that was part of his point when he mentioned that Ukrainian farmers have not had to innovate as much in their agricultural sector. Not saying that they *haven't*, but perhaps they've not needed to be as ruthless to their soil as elsewhere has been. Just a thought, though, so don't take that necessarily as fact - just my two cents.
@@mikaelantonkurki No, it can mitigate the loss and plants of genus fabaceae can draw in some nitrogen and draw some nutrients from deeper parts of soil. But absolutely not enough to sustain modern agriculture. And it's worrying that some people don't know that.
@@ingloriuspumpkinpie9367Most people on the internet are about as agriculture-illiterate as is physically possible. Which is also why there's so much misinformation floating around.
Yes, but you need overall less phospate for a while at least. of course you can also drain the ground if you do this, and you can't put as much fertizer into chernozem or you will overfertilize more easily. and specially for things like sunflowers that drain the ground quickly it's true that it would drain outher grounds much quicker.
You won't enter it in the next 5 years anyway. Countries such as the Netherlands, Hungary, Slovakia and citizens who will have to pay to Ukraine will not allow this.
Could make Ukrainian grain have an internal tariff to export to Europe to help reconstruction efforts post war. Instead of selling grain 4 € to 10€ Sell it at 4€+European export fee 4€ to Europes 10€ Still competitive and gives time for the European market to adjust to the cheaper foodstuff overtime and keep food prices low for generations to come.
I think we need to account for Ukraine currently diversifying its workforce away from agriculture at extreme speed: refugees get trained to fill roles in as in healthcare and hospitality, soldiers are training in logistics, as mechanics and in construction, civilians in Ukraine are replacing those who left, taking jobs in a wide range of manufactories etc etc. I learned A LOT of random skills during my military service, some of which I did something with and others I laugh at a decade later. Ukrainians are not returning to the pre-feb 22 nation after the war is won.
@@etienne8110 Apply some math to the problem. We don't know casualty figures, so they must be bad, but we do get estimates of about 250,000. Let's say that is per year (dead or wounded beyond full rehabilitation). Ukraine has about 44 million residents, and a birth rate around 9/1k, so it should have about 400,000 births per year. If only men serve, they'd be running a slight deficit. If girls serve, they should have a population surplus. That is to say, their population still gets smaller because old people also still die, and the workforce declines because old people retire. But they should be able to replace their meatshields for quite a long time. After the war there'll probably be a smaller workforce, as that generation suffered most casualties. Though many can still do some sort of work, and women will be used to labor. Either way, this should suit farms: those require few workers per square mile.
Well, there's also topic of refugees, since a lof ot them probably gonna want to return to Ukraine after the whole deal is over Most of them aren't sitting on their asses and they are working, and by how job market is shaped, most of them are working in service and manufacturing buisness and that equals to experience, experience that they gonna probably want to apply when they come back
As a Romanian, I think it should also be mentioned that Polish and Romanian grains follow EU regulations, while Ukrainian ones don't. So it's no surprise our farmers are upset they have to compete with farmers who don't need to follow the rules, while also having larger fields.
Competition is good. If all participants have to oblige to the same rules and regulations. UA now doesn’t need to comply with massive bureaucracy of being EU member. Or delete all those regulatory requirements or comply with them like the rest of EU farmers…
That's BS. Ukraine follows just the same rules. The thing is that Ukraine produces mostly forage grain, which is in itself cheaper and has worse quality (because it is to feed animals, not humans). But Ukraine also produces sunflower oil, corn, milk and other products in quantities unattainable for the EU farmers and much cheaper. This fixation with grain only indicates that one is not in touch with the issue
The EU imposes regulations, meaning Ukrainian farmers have to pay more in bribes to get certified, which raises the cost of their products. In the end, Romanian farmers get screwed, Ukrainian farmers get screwed, and European consumers get screwed, while the respective governments make a neat profit. I think that's just 'working as intended'?
I think this also projects into why and how eastern Europe needs to be taken more seriously. For a long while, in my point of view as an American, eastern Europe has been viewed as a lesser backwater of the continent.
Unfortunately, it’s not just in the US. Even in ‘Western European’ countries (EU15) with lower average incomes than some of the post 2002 intake, they still look down on Eastern Europe as if once you cross the Oder you’re in some sort of Boratland where everyone keeps pigs in their house and drinks vodka for breakfast. This is a bit of a cliche; but I blame the Soviets. They split Europe in Two, kept vibrant societies and economies in stasis for 40+ years, asset stripping some countries of their industrial base and expertise as ‘war reparations’, forcing people to move around so Stalin could feel secure and seeing any cultural expression as something to be snuffed out as fascism rather than cherishing it. We in Western Europe also spent that time thinking that Eastern Europe was somehow diametrically opposed to us culturally/economically when we were all in the same spot (generally) pre 1938. We all have to learn to move on.
@@Whatshisname346yea Soviet’s did certainly hold back the development after the Second World War. Socialism and state planning of economies has a tendency to do that. -however, it isn’t fair to blame just the soviets. Before the world wars, Eastern Europe was lagging far behind. Western and Northern Europe. Although it’s been that way for many centuries. The view of “the backward Eastern Europe” has been a common thought in the eyes of Western Europeans since the Middle Ages
@@kogoruneconomically speaking yes. But it's not like it was ravaged by a massive war that destroyed everything. Even the Yugo wars were not particularly destructive(until the US bombings). There is a crap ton of factories that the communists build connected to roads, rail roads and rivers that can be very useful for European manufacturing. Something that Europe needs. Not only that but you also have a huge number of experts to look after production since most EE countries outrank most WE in terms of scientific merit. In fact it when it comes to discovery and accuracy of studies we tend to be among the best in the world. You also have a huge cheap labour force and so on. I've been thinking a lot about why WE ignored EE and to me it seems that it's just a pure case of xenophobia.
Don’t know if you noticed, but the black soil portion says “Midwest” then puts the pin in Arizona, which is just in the West, and is not known for being particularly cold as far as I’m aware.
Arizona is basically desert. The pin looks more like its in southern California, which is a big hub for agriculture, but I don't think it's a black earth zone. Most of the water for agriculture there is imported from the rockies, and its still drying up.
hearing about how the war in Ukraine caused food shortages in Sri Lanka and Afghanistan got me into geopolitics so I'm really happy kraut is taking about this
I think its honestly interesting seeing how different countries in Europe’s deal with agriculture policies. As an Norwegian one of the most important reasons we did not join the EU was result of agriculture. Over here it was fear being flooded with cheaper agricultural goods from the Dutch, I think if Ukraine does join the EU after war then it likely make Norway joining even less likely
Ukraine WILL join post war. That much is simply unavoidable by this point. As for Norway, that's just not a concern for the EU. The status quo on that front is very much agreed upon as generally good here in the continent. So if you don't wanna join we won't pressure you. Its not like we wanna expand for expansion's sake. Besides the Mercosur deal was gonna push you away anyway so its not like we can change that by this point. Norway looks after its people, EU is trying to exert soft power to guarantee a favourable climate for western democracy. So we can't afford to sit by and be protectionist like that, but you can.
@@thespanishinquisition4078 oh defently, my comment was more on the EU debate overhere. There was some polls that showed the more pro-EU side positions increasing as a result of the war. My comment was more speculation of my own home country and our relationship with the EU which likely stay the same foreseeable future.
What I'm surprised is why does anyone care so much bout the farmers? This isn't the 1200s, farming employs only a small percentage of the population. Fuck farmers, give me cheaper food!
These videos are great for Americans to get better insights into European perspectives. We don't consider these things much over here and the subsidies thing comes as no surprise to me.
There's deeper levels to this, the agricultural subsidy is a substantial part of the current EU budget. Farmers don't want to renegotiate because they like what they have now, but the current subsidy program will collapse if Ukraine joins. Either the subsidies will be spread so thin every EU farmer loses, or we'd have to increase membership contributions. Another issue that Krant mentioned but simply said we should avoid is foreign ownership of capital. In his book Capital an Ideology Thomas Picketty explains that Eastern memberstates transfer about as much money to Western memberstates as they get in EU development funds. Relatively poor societies in Eastern Europe transfer great amounts of wealth every year to the richest people in Western Europe. This isn't a blip, or a minor issue, but a major question the EU would prefer not to notice.
Not the first time, i.e. not only Haiti. Also, don't blame those (agricultural) subsidies - no country wants to be dependent on another country when it comes to nutrition, because "another country" could blackmail them the way Russia did to Poland, holding their hand on the gas valve and saying "the pressure for lower? Must be a leak".
@@EpicgamerwinXD6669 You have your 2nd amendment rights for a fucking reason. You're ~60 years late to actually justifying having it. In short, you have orders of magnitude less right to bitch about them than if any other place had pulled these same shenanigans.
Great video, as always. But an interesting fact that should also be mentioned, is that, despite the crazy rich soil and great climate in Ukraine, average yields per area are still significantly lower than in North America and Western/Central Europe. The reason is that most Ukranian farmers lack the capital to invest into advanced tools, hybrid and GMO seeds, irrigation, etc., meaning that they are less efficcient. And yet Ukraine is a competitive agricultural powerhouse. One can only imagine, how titanic it could be, if they reach the same level as western farmers. Perhaps a way to solve this dilemma, would be to make lucrative deals with Asian and Middle Eastern countries, most of which are net importers of grain. Ukraine could successfully compete with the likes of the US and Brazil. Plus, China would definetly appreciate diversifying it's grain supply, as a US embargo could push them to the brink of famine...
Agreed, I think EU legislation should maybe focus the first few years after Ukraines aseccion into the EU on exporting Ukrainian food producsta nd slowly lowering the amount taht needs to be exported over a few decades so farmers have time to adapt, amybe like 80% needs to be exported and then each year this threshold is lowered by 5%, if we include protections for Ukrainian farms to be bought up during thsi tranisition period it should work out, it make sthe impact on the market lower, while still pressuring the farmers to change or go bust. I perosnally hate the common European agricultural Policiy, farmers shouldnt have this much power in my opinion, Ukrainian grain is a good way to also reclaim former farmland in the EU and use it as new green land, reforesting etc. it allows us to lower our carbon impact make western Europe more resilient againgst climate change and pushes our agriculture to develope or specialize more while ukrainian farmerts gain more money which can be used to rebuild ukraine and devolope their industry to be even stronger. If urkaine were able to feed all of ewurope we would have one less problem for climate change to worry about in th near future even better if it allows us to lower carbon impact and maybe even export this cheap food to struggeling places and lower prices stabilizing these regions and increasing EU influence there to help us promote democracy and relations.
@@21preend42They let Brazil and Argentina (both right in the US's backyard) do that, and Europe can assert it's interests far better than developing Latin American nations. I admit it's not a perfect idea to sell China cheap grain, as any trade with that regime is problematic, but anything that will help Ukraine build back has to be considered. And China is only one potential partner.
Farmer protectionism is a global reality. Maybe it's not so bad; it's important for food prices to be stable. A reliable food supply is the basis of civilization.
The problem is also creating a vulnerable dependency on imports of vital resources from just one country. Germany just had to learn a harsh lesson on that subject.
In general I'm for open markets, but I have to admit that food production is a bit different. I think a lot of farming would be out competed in my country without any subsidies and tariffs on other countries, which might be good for the consumer in some ways, but if any unforeseen event happens that hinder the import of the food, there would be food shortages and possibly starvation. I guess it's a trade off between market efficiency and market stability.
I fear that Dutch agricultural corporations are buying up too much Romanian land and are turning our farmers into cheap labour force that is forced out of Romania. I fear the west is using the east only for its advantage, as it did with its ports until now, in the detriment of again eastern ports.Rotterdam kept getting bigger while ports like the ones on the Black Sea which have now proven to have been of use to Ukraine are still in shambles. Strange times ahead.
@@skeolang7758when you are driven out of business, while also being economically brought on your knees, what do you expect would happen? Large Dutch/US corporations offer absurd sums of money by local standards (which *are* just yellow pennies for them), to ensure that all local producers would be permanently removed out of the market. Keep in mind that local farmers can't possibly compete with them regardless of everything.
@@peterdenov4898 if you will take a look on Ukrainian farmers structure, you will see, that majority of the market are large agroholdings that can compete with worldwide companies. Secondly, small landlords can lease their land (like me), not necessarily sell. Small farmer always will be out the competition, because he doesn't have the scale effect
I am not European, however I wish that you Europeans are able to solve this problem in a good way. I love your continent, it is my favorite one, so I hope for peace to come soon and for prosperity to reign supreme. Good luck to you all.
Ukraine joining would be far more destabilizing than any other previously mentioned example simply due to the scale of production & the low prices Ukranians are already accustomed to. The wealthier states can for sure recover and adapt over time, however, the former eastern bloc states that are much poorer can have their economies & public financial system severel disturbed that it is a question if they'll be able to recover. Although sympathetic to Ukraine, they can not be let into the EU before serious agricultural & systematic reform, otherwise we can all be screwed.
True, agree, but on the other hand - there are nazis from Ukraine that worship those who perpetueted Genocide of Wołyń. I see their full of antipolish comments everydey, if I go to Ukrianian matierial on RUclips. I wonder - how it is - on one hand Ukrainians behave like us, on personal level there is no tentions. Still often i read that killing Polish children was necessary act of decolonisation. Which is on big b....t in a first place, since Poles in for instance Małopolska Wschodnia were indigenous people (as Norman Davies written i "Gods Playgrond".). But really - if to Wołyń Poles came 800 years ago - does it give upa right to kill, usually after tortures, Poles, starting from chldren ,to make parents suffer more? Cowards with no honor from UPA chosen not to attacked Germans, becouse it may cose some wounds or even death - so they chosen to "bravery fight with babies. On the other hand - nor did Poles smth simillar to Ukrainian or any other puplation, neither f.e. Belarussian did same to Poles. I wonder - is becuse most Ukrainians are truly great antibanderstis, and only loud minority is vocal to protet nazism an that symbolik (red-black flag, gierojom slava - both stareted to be use in 1943. Gierojom slava is in traslation "hail to the heroes" and was refernce to the nazi German - you know which call.
Just a question on this, have you ever watched clarksons farm? It does a pretty good job of showing how the British farming industry is flat out unprofitable, and the government's half measures and loss of subsidies from Europe have pushed British farmers to either sell up or sell at a massive loss. In the UK, it opened up the discussion of farming and I would reccomend it as a thing to watch to show a potential future for Europe if it isn't careful with how it deals with Ukrainian membership
British farming is unprofitable at current land values. Once half the unprofitable farms sell at a loss the remaining, twice as large, farms will make money. A 4000ha wheat farm in england is much more productive than a 4000ha wheat farm in Australia.
@@mabamabam Yeah, except English farmland aren't really well suited for farming in large industrial scale when fields are small, weirdly shaped and not flat enough to use truly massive machinery. So even if a corp buys up all the land and replot the fields they would still be having difficulty to scale up as much as they can in the US or Australia. Granted, corporate industrial farming would still be more profitable than the current state, but it's going to find it hard to compete against the rest of Europe that runs on similar regulations but more scaleability or countries outside of Europe that farms on less strict regs and thus lower cost. And that's excluding the problems with NIMBYs everywhere.
Greeting from Netherlands. It's amazing how consistently you're able to weave together historical and political perspectives, all relevant to an intriguing story that has a clear message about what we should do in the future. Thanks a lot and keep it up!
As a European leftist who is favoring the deregulation of markets, for the sake of lowering food costs... that shift is something I've noticed, and its fascinating to see right wingers argue for regulation and protectionism, and opposed by social democrats and socialists, who then argue for freer markets. European politics are often so silly, frustrating, and deeply interesting.
Thats such an uneducated take. And also who tf are the leftiats that want ukraine in the EU? I havent met one yet. The only people i can see who are interested are big companies who see a new cheap labor market and idiots who want ukraine to join to spite ruzzia
@@attilamarics3374 Generally, food surplus keeps countries stable, with food pressure as a #1 source of instability. As long as that other country cannot threaten you with the food, it improves stability. So, if you wrap that other country in a deep binding institution that prevents separation, importing cheap food is good for stability.
I think it's mostly because the old left collapsed in most countries. It still held powerful institutional structures though, and reinvented itself, generally by mixing itself with rightwing features. In response to that vacuum, the 'new right' emerged, which is arguably better defined as actually left-wing. The old left likes unions (i.e. institutions) while the new right tends to favor the workers. At this point, the binary is completely useless: "populist right", "populist left" and "establishment" in a triangle, are a more functional model. Socialists, in my experience, increasingly favor the new-right. Neo-socialists tend to collaborate with the new left. Probably quite different in your country. Here, both the "left" and the old "right" are closer to mercantilist factions warring over which multinationals get your taxpayer money and favoring regulating the shit out of everything (which oddly tends to help out their favored multinationals. A coincidence, surely). They likewise have different lists of captive institutions. While the new-right favors patriotism, isolationism and to some extent an actual free market within in it. But the new right is still rather a loose coalition of people who are sick of the establishment, so there's a lot of variation within it.
Ukraine was exporting many of their ag products to Africa and the Middle East. The reason their dumping their ag products into neighboring EU nations is because they can't export anything via their Black Sea ports and their aren't direct rail links to ports in those countries. Once the war is over I would imagine they'd go back to exporting to Africa and the Middle East.
Well ships have returned to the ports of Greater Odesa despite russian efforts so the situation is slightly better now (Danube ports still remain the most secure export route). But rail situation is indeed bad as we have a different track gauge than the rest of Europe.
As a Polish Femboy, this worries me. If there is less need for polish agricultural products, then that will lead to uncertainty, uncertainty will lead to stress, stress leads to coping, and many cope by being cute. There will be a flood of already saturated femboy market and i will be pushed out of competition. I might have to end up finding some unrelated work to keep me afloat. Perhaps even becoming a farmer
Greetings from Ukraine. Ukrainian Agriculture will definitely change in coming years, mostly because how many fields touched by war. Demining them will not be quick or cheap. And not only agriculture market will change but also IT, weapons, and energy sectors. Job market will be way more competitive. Structural changes will touch everyone in EU sooner or later, no matter with or without Ukraine as an actual member. This is the way of progress and growth... I just hope we will restore our country&borders and this cycle of terror will end in my land
The thing that crippled the Haitian rice farming industry was “The Caribbean Basin Initiative” (described in this video). But it was a trade initiative initiated by the 1983 Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), and came into effect on January 1, 1984. So what does Bill Clinton, who took office 10 years later in 1993, have to do with it?
Even before of the war Ukrainian demographics were in terrible shape and this war hasn't helped one bit. Quite the opposite. Ukraine joining EU will just add another dying country to the list of dying countries.
Best thing for Ukraine was to stay neutral and trade their goods with both east and west. But too late for that. And reality is, Ukraine will never be equal to the rest of us in EU, because they have no bargaining power anymore. Russia has completely blocked them and the only place Ukraine can export is EU. So what are they gonna do if we don't want to pay them a fair price for their goods? Are they gonna let their goods rot rather than take pennies for them?
Ukraine stayed neutral in the 1990s and the period was characterized by Russian meddling in the Ukrainian politics. Neutrality means being unprotected from Russian aggression. Please educate yourself
Few caveats: 1) the issue with Ukrainian agriculture is not only the relative advantage of black soils but also the ownership structure: in countries like Hungary, Romania or Poland most gains, vegetables etc. is produced by small to medium sized farmers while in Ukraine it is owned by few agricultural holdings. This way utilising the economies of scale and disproportionate influence over markets they can annihilate farmers form other countries and force smaller EU members (like say Slovakia) into a relation of dependence. 2) currently with EU borders open to Ukrainian grains, Ukrainian farmers(and remember we’re talking about multinationals here) get an enormous advantage since they don’t need to worry about any competition on their internal market and they aren’t subject to European agricultural practice standards.
Nothing that chemical fertilizers can't solve. American agriculture can still hold their own the same way Texas held out against Venzuela dumping oil for pennies onto the global market.
"agricultural holdings" is a typical Polish propaganda that has nothing to do with reality. after the collapse of the usSR, state agricultural land was divided among villagers, as these villagers were the owners of this land until 1921. Over the years, old people died and left their land as an inheritance to their children and grandchildren. it is impossible to sell this land, as there is no legal mechanism for selling in Ukraine, so this land is leased to farmers. ukrainian farmers are usually small entrepreneurs who lease land in one to five villages. There are also large farming companies with state-of-the-art equipment and technologies, but their market share is no more than 20%. there are also intermediary companies that buy crops from small and medium-sized farmers and export them abroad, mainly to Asia and Africa. At the same time, Ukrainian farmers, unlike Polish farmers, do not receive any subsidies from the country's budget. so, Polish farmers are losing the market struggle where the competitor gives consumers a more affordable price and blames agroholdings for some reason, not their own unprofitable business model.
I think it’s fair to say that much of the corruption can be traced back to the Soviet era. But regardless, it’s important that we have a sober view on how corrupt Ukraine is relative to the rest of the EU, especially Western/Northern Europe. The fact that Ukraine does not have a long lineage of respect for individual freedoms and rule of law should also be viewed thru a sober view. It’s concerning for good reason, and those things will have to be addressed and worked on
@@ayararesara6253 I would agree. The EU definitely does contain nations that struggle with corruption. But that doesn’t mean they should add even more of them.. that’ll of course be left up to Europe to decide. I just think that the situation with Ukraine needs to be addressed honestly. I do t think it’s wise to paint it as a bastion of liberal democracy.
A Polish historian here. This video treats Ukrainian farmers as if Ukrainian agrarian economy was completly dominated by small farmers. Which shows a complete lack of research on your part. For anyone who would like to actually learn more about Ukrainian grain, I encourage you to read my comment further, my sources will be linked below unlike Krauts sources, since I think here he just made shit up because simple googling would tell him how does the Ukrainian structure of farmland ownership looks like . The Ukrainian agriculture like any other Ukrainian market is dominated by a select few agricultural companies that completly control the Ukrainian agriculture. [1] The country's agriculture is run completly through these companies and also a few select foreign corporations that have enough money for lawyers that can find legal loopholes to extend the ban on sale of land between 2001 and 2016. The goverment functionally run by oligarchs had no ability or political will to prevent the centralisation of Ukrainian agriculture, and now since Zelensky's goverment has pursued a policy of extensive privatisation [2], it doesn't seem like the Zelensky's priority is a reaquistion of illegally bought land. So why does this matter to the larger point of the video? Well, Kraut's whole thesis is that the subsidies to European farmers are going to hurt small and independent Ukrainian farmers, that are implied to be the majority of owners of agricultural land. The problem is that as I have proven before, this is not true. So the whole thesis falls apart, since agricultural subsidies are exactly what would hurt the corporations that are the majority of landowners of Ukraine and would give power back to small, regular farmers. The subsidies as a political tool has been used exactly in this way, in the EU since it's inception since many agrarian parties didn't want to compromise their voting block, and so European agriculture remains largely owned by small family farms. [3] This only shows how little research goes into his videos, since such basic information is incredibly easy to find. Or he simply created the video, as typical liberal propaganda piece meant to show the viewer the "wonders" of free market. It's anyone's guess. Sources: 1. www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/Brief_CorporateTakeoverofUkraine_0.pdf 2. www.reuters.com/world/europe/buoyed-by-sale-small-state-assets-ukraine-eyes-bigger-sell-off-2023-05-11/ 3. ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/SEPDF/cache/73319.pdf
as a Ukrainian I agree with you. Most Ukrainians unfortunately do not benefit from the rich lands since as you said a few oligarchs own it all. Therefore, I personally would not feel bad if they all go bankrupt because to be honest. They do a terrible job with the preservation of land, employee wellbeing and even production efficiency.
"the "wonders" of the free market"? i got the impression that if you have to hold back what SHOULD BE a human right because people would suffer, the current system could either be improved (not happening under capitalism lolol) or replaced anyway how do i link comments? i wanna share yours around
His overall point is still correct. Whether it's a large farm or a small farm, Ukrainian agriculture poses risks to Europe. And heavy European subsidies will create problems for Ukraine.
My grandmother always says that the reason for Russia's invasion is the conquest of the Ukrainian black earth. Her opinion is probably based on the stories of her grandfather, who fought in Romania and Ukraine during WW1 and said that the local farmers harvested much larger crops with less effort compared to Bavaria.
@@user-tn1pf5fp2bRF is as Russian Empire as Romania is to Rome. All aristocracy in RE was killed in 20ies. Literally, ethnic structure changed between 1890 and 1930. USSR denied any legacy from RE. RF accepted USSR legacy which denied RE legacy.
Something important to mention here that was left out. Ukraine also supplies alot of its current agricultural produce to the developing world. Including places where food scarcity is already pretty acute due to geography. So a collapse of Ukrainian agriculture would have horrible implications for global hunger on the whole. Russia's blockade has already made things pretty bad. But not as bad as they could be.
Ukraine is NOT integrated into the EU and they can't sell their agricultural goods to European consumers. The only thing that they sold was animal feed to a few countries. The EU was allowing transporting agricultural goods through the EU because of the black sea blockade. How can you make such a massive blunder? You don't gain access to the single market just like that.
@@ffff7164good joke. International pariah, sanctioned, failed to take over Ukraine even after nearly 2 years of fighting, hundreds of thousands of young people leaving, hundreds of thousands of young people dying, increasingly authoritarian government, increasing lack of human rights, etc. that's a funny way of "winning", if you ask me.
The funny thing is that there’s a discurse going on here in Brazil that the reason mercosul-EU deal is taking so long to be reached is bc of our agriculture are too competitive for European farmers.
That is actually the reason. The French (and the German Meat farmers) Farmers will be cucked by your meat production, which is why they throw a hissy fit. In general, european farmers are very dependent in subsidies already, in my Country, almost 50% of their income is from EU subsidies, which Act in a soft planned agriculture. Which is why our agricultural sector is a Big mess.
I think one thing that is important to consider that was left out of the video is the stability that comes from having farmers within your own country. For example, Switzerland has had the lowest level of food inflation in all of the EU because they have protected their farmers from lower cost imports. When the supply chain was interupted in 2020, they haven't had to bat an eye about food prices because most of it is made in state anyways. Now that we have seen what can happen even from a minor, temporary supply chain disruption, I think it is important for us to consider what a more serious, long term supply chain disruption could do to the price and availability of food within a country.
There was also a CSIS talk about this topic 2 months ago. If i remember correctly, one of the takeaways was that the rest of the world food market is large enough for Ukraine. Restrictions on this specific category would therefore be acceptable for both while openness in the rest of the economy would benefit both.
Fun fact about Italians farmers and breeders: they can’t possibly survive without subsidies. This is especially true in the northern parts of Italy (I happen to know the president of the south agricultural park of Lombardy) and even more so because no matter what happens, no one wants to modernize or change anything about their ways of production. The CAP (common agricultural policy) is also shrinking the subsidies to innovating farmers and giving them as normal subsidies that costs us 300k euros PER COMPANY. The EU is doubly ignoring that soon or later Ukraine will join the union.
Hello love the video it was quite interesting, and as a farm in New Zealand we have made 2 big mistakes that have really hurt a biggest market dairy. Our first big mistake was giving way our farming secretes to Chinese business because now they out produces us here in New Zealand, so now we can no longer sell to Chinese markets which was one the biggest markets we sold to and now it is closed of to use. The secound mistake we made was letting Fonterra become the "monopoly" they are today (Fonterra own 90% of the dairy market) so they are really the only one Dairy farmers can sell to but Fonterra only see it farms now as numbers so the treat them like sh*t and now a lot of our dairy farms are transitioning to beef farming so my country largest business Dairy is on a decline in the midst of a recession that could even turn in to a depression if we are not careful. Thanks to all who read my rant on dairy farming hope you enjoyed it.
New Zealand seems like it could benefit from a larger home grown cheese industry. I remember there wasn't too much local cheese when I was over there, and what there was was mostly clones of more famous European cheeses. NZ could create more of their own cheese varieties, and I think they could do very well. Cheese is also a fantastic way to increase your milk profits, the value added markup on cheese can be immense.
@@Croz89 I I have heard that some farmers down I the south island have started to make their own chesses but it won't probably take off because of it try to break in to a market already dominated by other cheese company
@@contentofdummys405 If they try to copy what the cheese company already makes, sure. The trick would be to make something different. That does take time and creativity, it won't be an instant win, but it could pay off very well in the long run.
My dude Kraut, you made this whole video without mentioning the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement that's about to be signed this December. European markets are about to be flooded by the Brazilian, Argentinian, Uruguayan and Paraguayan agricultural output combined. Ireland and France opposed the deal every step of the way because they know once it's signed their non-luxury agri sector will be dead. Just Argentina and Brazil alone dwarfs in scale any EU country when it comes to agriculture. Thrown in Ukraine alongside Mercosur and all of Western and Central Europe industrial farmland will be over.
Yeah, if the deal is approved mercosur agricultural output is 7 times the output of Ukraine, after the war with Ukraine joining the storm to EU farms would already have passed
Which is what the EU wants. Hence why they are stiffeling west Eu farmers with bs nitrogen limits that will just relocate the nitrogen to less effecient places in east europe or south america
Finally! It makes no sense to grow wheat and non-luxury agri goods in europe, the rest of the world is much cheaper and the money and workers freed by this collapse can then go to more profitable sectors
What I don't get in this whole argument is (except for concervative autofellation) why TF western and central Europe clings so much to it's non-luxury agriculture. It's not food security, because it's already dependent on subsidies so much it would collapse if shit hits the fan hard enough to threaten imports. It's barely more then a rounding error in the GDP. And it's abhorrently inefficient.
In my newspaper about 20yrs ago it said there was a land grab in Ukraine by large European Agricultural Corps like The Co- Op (vertically integrating supply chains) from the UK. I've no idea how their ownership and imports into Europe were handled. Perhaps it bares scrutiny
Great video, although it overlooks one major thing - the security issue. No sane country will ever willingly destroy its own agricultural sector to the point that it can no longer reliably feed itself. And this is especially true after the COVID crisis, which revealed that European solidarity and cooperation disintegrate pretty quickly when push comes to shove. Specializing and making some cheeses is nice, but if the global food trade gets disrupted and food becomes scarce, it will not do the starving population much good.
I don't mind letting Ukraine join. But shouldn't there be a conversation to balance the needs of European farmers and Ukrainian farmers. Instead of saying we need to be equal seems kind of reductionist to me. Lowering food prices seems good but we should also protect the farmers jobs to some degree.
The whole point of the video, imo, is to show that Eastern Bloc countries benefitted from the equal treatment and there weren't tariffs imposed on them, which in turn took a toll on a west-EU farmers. And for the beneficiaries to say: "Yep we need tariffs" - but they didn't have to have them on their products back when they joined the EU, is a hypocrisy. Moreover, some of the countries, which had a competent leadership, such as Poland and Czechia, used all this money to innovate and improve the economy and Ukraine needs it as much.
@@mamai_eth It is a hypocritical yes, But that doesn't remove the fact that farmers will lose there businesses without tariffs. I don't know what to do but those (EU) farmers won't ever support Ukraine joining the EU unless we accommodate there needs somehow,
@@rob2540 Farmers of France, Germany and Italy had sacrificed their business to bring in the Eastern Bloc countries. If now they don't want to sacrifice, those farmers of France and Germany may very well come up with an argument that their sacrifice was for nothing, they didn't get the much cheaper products and they lost the market and the business. And start advocating for subsidies in their respective countries, which would lead the Eastern Bloc countries to lose the market they optimized for, for the last 20 years.
This might sound a bit naive, but couldn't governments in countries with less competitive grain production start mandating a certain minimum % of domestic grain that their millers, bakeries and supermarkets have to buy when purchasing grain products?
Heres a fun maths exercise. Look up your local wheat price and work out how much the wheat in a cheap loaf of bread is worth. I got about 7%. You could have free grain and the price of bread wouldn’t change much, the cost is mostly processing and logistics.
Almost fell from my chair laughing at the part about "breadbasket of empires". Man, both Ancient Greece and Rome colonized primarily Crimea, and not for the grain. Attributing Athens might to Crimean colonies is laughable, and for Rome it was such a far away province that no one actually cared about it. FYI: actual breadbaskets for Rome: Egypt, Africa, Sicilia. Kievan Rus benefited more from North-South trade route than from its own exports. Some resemblance of a "breadbasket" starts from PLC, but that notion in itself assumes certain degree of separation between the "empire" and this province, which somewhat was true for PLC, but definitely false for Russian Empire, which viewed Malorossia as an integral part of the Empire.
The 1980s crisis that you mention wasn't just Spain, although they are much bigger. It also happened in Portugal, we had to dismantle most of our agriculture to enter the EU. I agree we must treat Ukraine differently than all those that came before and they must be an equal partner like all the rest. Their black soil is a geographic advantage as much as sun should be to the southern countries. It's just a natural resource that can be harnessed. By them.
That is a tricky situation. Taking away the subsidies risks putting domestic farmers out of business. Leaving them in place would put Ukraine at a second class member status. Helping European farmers switch to fewer and more expensive crops and livestock might work….
Farm subsidies were killed off in New Zealand with the result being that our farmers compete happily with the rest of the world. Look up Frontera dairy.
@@kevinansley7353new zealand competes only for wool and lamb. Because they have low density and lots of grassy plains. This model wouldn t work for other countries and climate change puts it in jeopardy.
No problem in and of itself when farmers go out of business, as long as it's gradual. The most innovative ones find good niches that work for them, and end up taking over the failed ones. Since necessarily the imported produce is cheaper (otherwise, no problem anyway), everyone benefits from lower prices. With subsidies you pay less in the store, but you pay the other half in taxes (or, benefits not given since there was no money left). But two problems. One is that you end up importing your food, so you're dependent on other countries for your very survival. Should those relations go bad... Second problem: this assumes governments don't try to micro-manage how the economy should work. And we have no pesticide that works particularly well on politicians.
@@sorsocksfakeIt really depends on if the land still has utility. If the land is now completely unprofitable to farm, it can become at best cost neutral and at worst an economic burden on the nation.
As an Ukrainian our history and geography teachers have absolutely opposite moods, about Ukrainian history and geography. Like one of the best geography and one of the most horrific histories.
Paradoxically the more your blessed geographically it seems the worst things go historically, I think that's why Switzerland is so rich. if your geographically blessed you get jealous neighbors or if your latin América or africa, Generals who keep making themselves military dictators and use mining money to stay in charge.
@@vitaliitomas8121 The best agricultural territories, lots of iron, coal marganeese ore, nickel, black and brown peat, a bit of Gas, and oil, a lot of stone salt, and a lot of different things but not in the same quantity. Like Ukraine was top 10 steel produser before 2014 and top 15 till 2022. Most of Sulfur in the world, second most of cinnabar (mercury ore). Do i need to continue?
@@vitaliitomas8121 just a step? in ukraine there is not only steppe, but also mountains, forests, hills, a huge amount of resources, and much more, and why then because of some simple steppe with a large number of rivers, they tried to capture everyone who lived near Ukraine and those who lived quite far away
Something that caught my eye was that the Dutch Farmers Party(the ones that blockaded the roads and cities a while back) do not oppose the Ukrainian membership to the EU. In their plans, they mention that Ukraines requirements are not met, but they want to keep the option for them to join open. And then they briefly mention they want to intensify the collaboration between Dutch and Ukrainian agricultural sectors. Either they mean this cynically like kraut lays out at 10:14 . Which is not unthinkable because they have very close ties to the big farming companies. But it could also mean they are literally not thinking the consequences through of a Ukraine membership. In either case, not the best look.
If ukrainian foodstuffs are more competatively priced than that of other european farmers, than it is the responsibility of the latter to find ways to improve their own production so that they can compete. while at the same time it is the responsibility of ukraine to temper their relationship with the rest of the E.U in regards to agriculture so that relations dont sour in a way that will drag down the ukrainian people in the long term. and ultimately it is the responsibility of all parties involved to determine what relationship will be most beneficial in the long term.
The problem with the US-Haiti example isn't that free trade is a bad thing, the eventual goal is free trade between all countries, and farmers lose their jobs as countries develop because they move to other fields, in 1700 90% of Americans were farmers and today 1% are, and we don't want to go back. The problem is that Haitian society wasn't ready for a lot of farmers to take up new jobs, this led to more unemployment as the farmers didn't have options. Edit: also the US probably shouldn't subsidize agriculture
It wasn't that the Haitians weren't ready, it was that they were sold a story by the US government which then proceeded to pull a UNO reverse card by artificially pushing their own prices down to crush a competitor. So yes, the free trade in this example was the bad thing.
What? How? This is directly an example of a situation where there were no other fields and noone had any excess capital to create them either. All they have left is a capital-vacuum of crime, hungry mouths and cheap labor. Developing other fields takes money and time, they have no money to invest into education, nor to build factories - all they have is dirt cheap labor and foreign capital can get that from other, more stable countries. (Though their stability often comes from authoritarian dictatorships.)
@@CidVeldoril saying Haiti wasn't ready doesn't mean it's their fault, they were treated poorly by colonizing powers, but yes they weren't ready to get outcompeted by US markets. The trade deal's effects are just a symptom of Haiti's larger problem, that it hasn't been given opportunity to grow in other fields that aren't rice farming. The US has the world's largest fertile area but it's rich today because it diversified and only 1% of Americans are farmers.
Where they supposed to learn to code and take up jobs in Haitis thriving tech sector? Of course the problem was free trade. Tariffs exist for a reason. If free trade did not enter the chat the problem would not exist cause:effect
It jsut means we in the EU trying to prevent a Haiti happening in our countries. That is all, put a import tariff on Ukraine, should be one of the conditions of joining the EU.
One question I had during this video is: who are these famers that are mentioned so much? Because farmer isn't some homogenous class of people. There's a world of difference between small to medium scale family farms and huge scale monoculture export oriented agribussiness, and so little applies to both eqaully or even similarly. In my country brazil, at least, around 70% of food consumed in households is produced by small to medium family properties. while agribusiness is mainly oriented to exportation. A measure that impacted agribusiness wouldn't be much of a loss because such properties employ few workers and contibute very, very little in terms of taxes for the country's budget, all the while destroying the environment in many ways.
In New Zealand (where I live), we completely opened up our markets, and the farmers became more prosperous and more productive as they focussed on exporting. The EU should stop being so protectionist with trade it's ridiculous that I can buy EU products with no Tariff added but EU consumers can't get cheaper products because they have to protect unproductive industries.
*Uncompetitive industries. If we stopped protecting them, the end result is losing all of the manufacturing and all of the agriculture to the big multinational capital that has the resources to outsource and automate their production. Without any protectionism, Finnish agriculture would be gone, because we simply don't get as much sunlight as countries further south. Is that in our benefit? Being unable to manufacture or farm anything? No it isn't. Thanks to globalization and wealth concentrating to the hands of the few, the global economy is getting more and more competitive to such extent that a larger and larger percentage of people are unable to compete. Global markets are weighed against the small guy and the local industry. When these industries die out, so will the know-how, the machinery and the cumulative tradition. I don't know about the specific circumstances around New Zealand agriculture, but I very much doubt their solution can be applied to every other nation and their industries.
I know this isn't what you mean, but certain parts of this video give of the same vibe as when journalists told West Virginian coal miners to just learn coding when they lost their jobs.
There is 0 benefit to take ukraine in atm. Would be a romania 2.0 just even worse. The only ones who would benefit are eu corporations that can suck ukraine dry of cheap labor. EU already forwent its strict membership laws for the eastern expansion and it brought a lot of problems with it that we still feel today. We shouldn't let a corrupt semi democratic country in that easily
"Now Ukraine owns it's land" lol no. Check how land ownerships is structured and who is the owner, massive oligopolies owning hundreds thousands of square meters mostly by western corporations or some Ukrainian oligarchs. There is no such thing as small private farms in Ukraine.
It is difficult to say that Ukraine has wanted to be in the EU for decades, because this history only began with the Maidan. It was Türkiye that wanted to join the EU from the very beginning.
As Czech I agree with everything You said and the sentiment behind it. For now let’s help Ukraine in every way possible (Slava Ukraini!) and for future let’s think about the most fair way possible to invite and welcome Ukraine in our midst.
@Tigran-Abazyan It is problem. And very biig one. Hardly anyone knows what to do. EU never predicted, that there will be someone akin to enemy as one of the constituent nations of EU. Loong screening before accepting should have taken care of it (assuming country cannot backslide from democracy to shitocracy, that was wrong) So there are not levers. Or there is the one article nr.7 with limited voting, I thing that might help (Orban would use it as propaganda machine probably)… the other is to wait on still existing elections and hope for change (while Orban commands media)
As a Romanian I want to say that our farms are already in a bad situation, so if we get completly killed by Ukraine, that will be terrible and sad for how good our foods can be when are done good, and I can say the same for Bulgaria, Poland or Hungary
Well you missed the fact that Ukrainian corruption make it worse - recently corruption scandal (Ok I admit that there is at least 1 a week recently so you might loose track) where it turned out that Ukrainians were smuggling their wheat into EU but it wasn't only quality below EU standard (and remind you one of the fact that EU grain is more expencive is due to quality regulations) but it was also below ukrainian quality standard. And that's also huge problem.
Really mind boggling a RUclipsr has to bring these to light and there are probably dozens of politicians with thumbs stuck up their bums worrying about their upcoming vacations instead.
Thank you for another fine upload. This problem doesn't seem new to me, Europe has been equalizing it's internal economy north-south through farming subsidies for a long time. It won't be very popular in the mediterranean countries, but the transfer of wealth will have to change west-east and the grain issue will be only one of many issues that we've dealt with before. Cheap labour will be just as problematic I think, just as it was when many eastern countries joined EU. It seems to work out though. For EU as a whole; incorporating the most valuable farmland in the world is a clear net-plus if you ask me. Taking responsibility for a poor and war-ravaged Ukraine will be costly but imperative to the european peace-project.
Yeah I'm not seeing how Hungary or France would ever vote them into the EU. After this war is over, whatever the outcome, Ukraine is going to be so reliant on foreign aid, that i can't see it ever happening.
With all due respect, I dont think Ukraine will be able to join in the foreseeable future. Stemming not only from the current conflict and from the institutions and government, but also due to the fact that it would be too big and difficult to integrate. EU has internal structural problems that need to be solved and adding another country to eat up EU funds wouldn t do the Union any good. There are still member states (Romania and Bulgaria) that aren t allowed into the Schengen zone and yet we are talking about future enlargement ? To me it just seems like political flag waiving. A token of solidarity and nothing more..
Where there is a will there is a way. Ukraine has the political motivation to rebuild itself as a better nation. During and after a war a nation can shift its policies and habits drastically. Not only is rebuilding Ukraine an investment into the future, but can become a significant contributor to the European Union and be a major net contributor. Romania doesn't have a fire under it to change it's politics of corruption, societal systems, laws and regulations.
I was always under the impression that the US south had the most black soil in the world but turns out that it’s an entirely different kind of soil that’s especially good for certain plants like cottons but not as good for food crops. I love how I always learn new things when I watch Kraut videos even when they are tangential to the subject matter at hand!
Your videos are top notch. Thanks for another. By the way, the phrase you use at 8:17 should be "for all intents and purposes," and not "intensive purposes." Unless you were joking, which is very funny, if so.
It's a pretty reasonable error, especially for a non-native English speaker. I've always thought it was incredibly strange that such legalese somehow made it into the general lexicon.
We need more like Kraut, who can frame problems in a proper manner, so we then can engage in proper discourse, to come to solutions that will benefit all.
Agricultural subsidies never made sense to me. "Save us from the scourge of cheap food!" they cry. Ukraine having good soil and therefore being a powerhouse doesn't break the logic of capitalism. The logic of capitalism is that comparative advantage is a good thing. It doesn't matter how that comparative advantage is obtained, whether by technology or luck of geology.
Warm greetings from Ukraine and thank you for being a reliable source of thoughtful, unbiased discussions about the topics most important to us! There is unimaginable levels of generational trauma in Ukrainians from centuries of imperialistic rule. Just last century 4+ millions were starved to death in 3 man-made famines (the 1932-1933 one named Holodomor for it's devastating ruin) organised by the Soviets. And now, to see our beautiful countryside plundered by russia again while facing a looming trading blockade from the West is too painful. I hope sense prevails and mutually beneficial agreements can be found, that respect us as equal participants.
It is called justice
Не 4, а минимум 40. Мало берешь, хлопчик.
@@maksim05makarov в 33-34 умерло также много русских на юге. Но ты идиот будешь смеяться. Не позорься
@@avreliyfivas265 я чет не помню, чтобы у нас говорили «это искусственный голод устроенный Сталиным чтобы истребить нашу нацию». Мне кажется что украинская сторона гораздо больше сделала для того, чтобы это трагедия воспринималась как комедия.
@@user-ce8lq5tq8w Transnistria is yours for the talking if you have the balls, it's controlled by Russian proxies, not Ukraine.
I love kraut videos cause I’ll click on it like “time for some eu geopolitics” and I’ll learn why Haitians hate bill Clinton
It’s also a good reminder of the negative effect of well intended charity work and aid to poor countries. Sending food and clothes for free to poor people might be noble in intention but actually undercuts the cost of business for local producers who grow food/make stuff etc. They can’t compete with free so they lose out on business and end up as poor as everyone else around them, damaging the local economy even more long term.
@@Nuuk_Nuke_Nookyeah, like he totally didn’t have sexual relations with that woman
@@Nuuk_Nuke_Nook Kosovo
Reformed orthodox rabbis can be so annoying sometimes
"Want to learn about Spain's modern public transport system?"
"Sure"
"Okay, see, our story begins with founding of the Aztec Empire..."
Re: the Haitian rice story, I’ve heard of a similar story about Mexican maize post-NAFTA. Cheap, subsidized US corn flooded the market and upended farmers’ livelihoods. This economic havoc contributed to the early-2000’s economic migration of Mexicans into the US. American ag subsidies are no joke.
It's also, indirectly, contributed to the explosion in avocado's popularity, since so many Mexican farmers switched to that.
I was wondering if I should use the Mexican or Haitian example, and in the end decided to use the example of Haiti because I used the Mexican example before.
@@Kraut_the_Parrot good choice since I don't know a lot about Haiti, and I think most don't know about Haiti compared to nafta. Learned something new!
I actually studied this for my postgrad and there is a lot more nuance to the
Mexico story than the Haitian one.
Mexico has a problem with only a few families owning the best agricultural land and had for decades had protectionist agriculture policies, and as such didn’t invest in agriculture technology.
On top of that just after NAFTA was signed there was a problem with a civil war in southern Mexico, and the peso crisis, and then the cartels.
That deal was still a net gain for mexico, but i agree that free trade should be FREE TRADE, with no unfair advantages of corpos colluding with the gov
Still feels so strange to hear you talk about a 'post war europe' and the implication that is not the Europe we have now.
it will be, modern europe is not capable of total peace and absence of conflict without a major transformation
it will be totally different indeed
All Europes are post-war Europes
Canadian here, A fun fact about the Canadian prairies is that when the Prairies were transferred from the jurisdiction of London to Ottawa, our Prime Minister at the time, Sir Wilfred Laurier promoted the immigration of many Ukrainian farmers to the Prairies where they would help bring their expertise in farming and experience to help develop the Prairies. Many of the poor peasants got land grants to homesteads across the west of Canada (which was a step up from their lives in the Russian/Austrian empires and later the Soviet Union) and it helped the population on the Praries boom.
Yee where my family came from. I think Ukraine should go to Canada. And Siberia. And Kazakhstan. And Mongolia.
There's a novel related to this wave of emigration by Ukrainian writer Vasyl Stefanyk "The Stone Cross" (1900). Our children read it at school.
Canada actually has one of the largest populations of ethnic Ukrainians in the world even now. I think we're 3rd place behind Ukraine itself and Russia. My great grandfather was born in Donetsk.
@@unlikelyhero3167 Bukovina for my own. Atleast I am pretty sure. Somewhere in Austrian Ukraine. For my family is pro central powers on my fathers side.
Didn’t Ukrainians also move to the prairies since the climate was similar?
Hi, I'm Ukrainian.
I have a few words. My uncle is a professional agronomist and I also know some farmers in personal.
The story about very cheap Ukrainian food after EU membership is a little bit overestimated, mostly because of the current abnormal conditions in Ukrainian economy.
Today Russian naval blockade of our ports is still a big deal. Ukraine doesn't have enough barns and elevators to store so much harvest for such a long time. That's why the last 2 years of war, UA farmers had to sell their products almost at cost price. Otherwise, their harvest will decay and you'll not have enough money for the next year sowing. Of course, it caused a huge impact on the Western market, as the only place where you can sell your products, but it mostly a consequence of war, and not just a "cheating advantage" of fertile soil.
Also, it's important to mention that Ukrainian yield per hectare is much lower then, for instance, in the USA. Despite a very nice natural conditions, UA farming technologies are still not modern enough to give similar results. Relatively high Ukrainian agricultural numbers are mostly the consequence of the fact that Ukraine, after being imperial "bread-basket" for hundreds of years, today is the most plowed country on the Earth which caused a very bad impact on our ecology.
Another big factor is a labor cost, which is currently lower than it will be after membership. If labor market of Ukraine will be opened to EU and vice versa, our employers will be forced to compete in salaries that will increase food cost.
very compelling argument！
As a fellow Ukrainian, I can also confirm he's right about the agricultural situation and the impact of the war on the food market
@@Silver_Prussian ...because they are at war
Rest assured that every EU customer who once could buy a Liter of sunflower oil from Ukraine for less than 1€ and now has to pay at least 3€ for locally produced oil, welcomes a post-war Ukraine into the EU. Not everyone owns a farm but is more worried about their cost of living.
People in the west forgot how important controlling black sea and Crimea are for Ukrainian grain exports.
You obsolutely need fertilizers even when farming on chernozem. You are taking nutrients from soil, and while some are returned from mineralization and through rainfall, modern agriculture just cannot be sustained without them.
Crop rotation
I also think that was part of his point when he mentioned that Ukrainian farmers have not had to innovate as much in their agricultural sector. Not saying that they *haven't*, but perhaps they've not needed to be as ruthless to their soil as elsewhere has been. Just a thought, though, so don't take that necessarily as fact - just my two cents.
@@mikaelantonkurki No, it can mitigate the loss and plants of genus fabaceae can draw in some nitrogen and draw some nutrients from deeper parts of soil. But absolutely not enough to sustain modern agriculture. And it's worrying that some people don't know that.
@@ingloriuspumpkinpie9367Most people on the internet are about as agriculture-illiterate as is physically possible.
Which is also why there's so much misinformation floating around.
Yes, but you need overall less phospate for a while at least. of course you can also drain the ground if you do this, and you can't put as much fertizer into chernozem or you will overfertilize more easily. and specially for things like sunflowers that drain the ground quickly it's true that it would drain outher grounds much quicker.
As a Ukranian, thank you for both remembering us and spreading truth about these complex and often overlooked topic.
You won't enter it in the next 5 years anyway. Countries such as the Netherlands, Hungary, Slovakia and citizens who will have to pay to Ukraine will not allow this.
Could make Ukrainian grain have an internal tariff to export to Europe to help reconstruction efforts post war.
Instead of selling grain
4 € to 10€
Sell it at
4€+European export fee 4€ to Europes 10€
Still competitive and gives time for the European market to adjust to the cheaper foodstuff overtime and keep food prices low for generations to come.
I think we need to account for Ukraine currently diversifying its workforce away from agriculture at extreme speed: refugees get trained to fill roles in as in healthcare and hospitality, soldiers are training in logistics, as mechanics and in construction, civilians in Ukraine are replacing those who left, taking jobs in a wide range of manufactories etc etc. I learned A LOT of random skills during my military service, some of which I did something with and others I laugh at a decade later. Ukrainians are not returning to the pre-feb 22 nation after the war is won.
I pray that you are right and will help speed the transition.
Very few people *want* to be farmers given a choice. In the West it's about 3% .
Also lots of dead people.
Missing workforce won t be refilled for a while unless they take in massive immigration
@@etienne8110
Apply some math to the problem. We don't know casualty figures, so they must be bad, but we do get estimates of about 250,000. Let's say that is per year (dead or wounded beyond full rehabilitation).
Ukraine has about 44 million residents, and a birth rate around 9/1k, so it should have about 400,000 births per year. If only men serve, they'd be running a slight deficit. If girls serve, they should have a population surplus.
That is to say, their population still gets smaller because old people also still die, and the workforce declines because old people retire. But they should be able to replace their meatshields for quite a long time.
After the war there'll probably be a smaller workforce, as that generation suffered most casualties. Though many can still do some sort of work, and women will be used to labor. Either way, this should suit farms: those require few workers per square mile.
Well, there's also topic of refugees, since a lof ot them probably gonna want to return to Ukraine after the whole deal is over
Most of them aren't sitting on their asses and they are working, and by how job market is shaped, most of them are working in service and manufacturing buisness and that equals to experience, experience that they gonna probably want to apply when they come back
As a Romanian, I think it should also be mentioned that Polish and Romanian grains follow EU regulations, while Ukrainian ones don't. So it's no surprise our farmers are upset they have to compete with farmers who don't need to follow the rules, while also having larger fields.
Can't compete, huh?
Competition is good. If all participants have to oblige to the same rules and regulations. UA now doesn’t need to comply with massive bureaucracy of being EU member. Or delete all those regulatory requirements or comply with them like the rest of EU farmers…
That's BS. Ukraine follows just the same rules. The thing is that Ukraine produces mostly forage grain, which is in itself cheaper and has worse quality (because it is to feed animals, not humans). But Ukraine also produces sunflower oil, corn, milk and other products in quantities unattainable for the EU farmers and much cheaper. This fixation with grain only indicates that one is not in touch with the issue
The EU imposes regulations, meaning Ukrainian farmers have to pay more in bribes to get certified, which raises the cost of their products. In the end, Romanian farmers get screwed, Ukrainian farmers get screwed, and European consumers get screwed, while the respective governments make a neat profit.
I think that's just 'working as intended'?
"Our farmers"?
I think this also projects into why and how eastern Europe needs to be taken more seriously. For a long while, in my point of view as an American, eastern Europe has been viewed as a lesser backwater of the continent.
Economically speaking, eastern Europe kind of is the backwater of the continent. That's not to say anything bad of the people, of course.
Because Eastern Europe largely is the backwater of Europe.
Unfortunately, it’s not just in the US. Even in ‘Western European’ countries (EU15) with lower average incomes than some of the post 2002 intake, they still look down on Eastern Europe as if once you cross the Oder you’re in some sort of Boratland where everyone keeps pigs in their house and drinks vodka for breakfast.
This is a bit of a cliche; but I blame the Soviets. They split Europe in Two, kept vibrant societies and economies in stasis for 40+ years, asset stripping some countries of their industrial base and expertise as ‘war reparations’, forcing people to move around so Stalin could feel secure and seeing any cultural expression as something to be snuffed out as fascism rather than cherishing it.
We in Western Europe also spent that time thinking that Eastern Europe was somehow diametrically opposed to us culturally/economically when we were all in the same spot (generally) pre 1938.
We all have to learn to move on.
@@Whatshisname346yea Soviet’s did certainly hold back the development after the Second World War. Socialism and state planning of economies has a tendency to do that.
-however, it isn’t fair to blame just the soviets. Before the world wars, Eastern Europe was lagging far behind. Western and Northern Europe. Although it’s been that way for many centuries. The view of “the backward Eastern Europe” has been a common thought in the eyes of Western Europeans since the Middle Ages
@@kogoruneconomically speaking yes. But it's not like it was ravaged by a massive war that destroyed everything. Even the Yugo wars were not particularly destructive(until the US bombings). There is a crap ton of factories that the communists build connected to roads, rail roads and rivers that can be very useful for European manufacturing. Something that Europe needs. Not only that but you also have a huge number of experts to look after production since most EE countries outrank most WE in terms of scientific merit. In fact it when it comes to discovery and accuracy of studies we tend to be among the best in the world. You also have a huge cheap labour force and so on.
I've been thinking a lot about why WE ignored EE and to me it seems that it's just a pure case of xenophobia.
Don’t know if you noticed, but the black soil portion says “Midwest” then puts the pin in Arizona, which is just in the West, and is not known for being particularly cold as far as I’m aware.
in my defence, I did not draw that slide. I would have put the pin in Montana, which is where most black soils are in the U.S
Yeah when I think of Arizona, I don't particularly think of very cold weather, in fact the opposite
Arizona is basically desert. The pin looks more like its in southern California, which is a big hub for agriculture, but I don't think it's a black earth zone. Most of the water for agriculture there is imported from the rockies, and its still drying up.
You've got an example of "where's Austria", the European edition ;)
hearing about how the war in Ukraine caused food shortages in Sri Lanka and Afghanistan got me into geopolitics so I'm really happy kraut is taking about this
I think its honestly interesting seeing how different countries in Europe’s deal with agriculture policies. As an Norwegian one of the most important reasons we did not join the EU was result of agriculture. Over here it was fear being flooded with cheaper agricultural goods from the Dutch, I think if Ukraine does join the EU after war then it likely make Norway joining even less likely
Ukraine WILL join post war. That much is simply unavoidable by this point. As for Norway, that's just not a concern for the EU. The status quo on that front is very much agreed upon as generally good here in the continent. So if you don't wanna join we won't pressure you. Its not like we wanna expand for expansion's sake.
Besides the Mercosur deal was gonna push you away anyway so its not like we can change that by this point. Norway looks after its people, EU is trying to exert soft power to guarantee a favourable climate for western democracy. So we can't afford to sit by and be protectionist like that, but you can.
@@thespanishinquisition4078 oh defently, my comment was more on the EU debate overhere. There was some polls that showed the more pro-EU side positions increasing as a result of the war. My comment was more speculation of my own home country and our relationship with the EU which likely stay the same foreseeable future.
@@thespanishinquisition4078Ukraine will NOT join the EU after it loses the war. Not in the next 30 years at least.
What I'm surprised is why does anyone care so much bout the farmers? This isn't the 1200s, farming employs only a small percentage of the population. Fuck farmers, give me cheaper food!
These videos are great for Americans to get better insights into European perspectives. We don't consider these things much over here and the subsidies thing comes as no surprise to me.
There's deeper levels to this, the agricultural subsidy is a substantial part of the current EU budget. Farmers don't want to renegotiate because they like what they have now, but the current subsidy program will collapse if Ukraine joins. Either the subsidies will be spread so thin every EU farmer loses, or we'd have to increase membership contributions.
Another issue that Krant mentioned but simply said we should avoid is foreign ownership of capital. In his book Capital an Ideology Thomas Picketty explains that Eastern memberstates transfer about as much money to Western memberstates as they get in EU development funds. Relatively poor societies in Eastern Europe transfer great amounts of wealth every year to the richest people in Western Europe. This isn't a blip, or a minor issue, but a major question the EU would prefer not to notice.
So basically government subsidies are partially responsible for causing the downfall of Hati? Well that was a great use of tax dollars wasn't it?
Not the first time, i.e. not only Haiti.
Also, don't blame those (agricultural) subsidies - no country wants to be dependent on another country when it comes to nutrition, because "another country" could blackmail them the way Russia did to Poland, holding their hand on the gas valve and saying "the pressure for lower? Must be a leak".
Yeah I can't take anyone complaining about Haitian refugees, even if they are economic, seriously, especially if they're American.
america always creates problems for profit and then plays the victim when the consequences become internal problems, like migration
@@Pwn3540 so if your tax dollars were used to do something without your consent that must mean your responsible. Yeah, because that makes sense.
@@EpicgamerwinXD6669 You have your 2nd amendment rights for a fucking reason. You're ~60 years late to actually justifying having it.
In short, you have orders of magnitude less right to bitch about them than if any other place had pulled these same shenanigans.
Great video, as always. But an interesting fact that should also be mentioned, is that, despite the crazy rich soil and great climate in Ukraine, average yields per area are still significantly lower than in North America and Western/Central Europe. The reason is that most Ukranian farmers lack the capital to invest into advanced tools, hybrid and GMO seeds, irrigation, etc., meaning that they are less efficcient. And yet Ukraine is a competitive agricultural powerhouse. One can only imagine, how titanic it could be, if they reach the same level as western farmers.
Perhaps a way to solve this dilemma, would be to make lucrative deals with Asian and Middle Eastern countries, most of which are net importers of grain. Ukraine could successfully compete with the likes of the US and Brazil. Plus, China would definetly appreciate diversifying it's grain supply, as a US embargo could push them to the brink of famine...
thats not a good thing for our, as in western interests for China to diversify and become less dependant
Do you think US will let you deal with China and allow Ukraine to do whatever it wants ? lol
Agreed, I think EU legislation should maybe focus the first few years after Ukraines aseccion into the EU on exporting Ukrainian food producsta nd slowly lowering the amount taht needs to be exported over a few decades so farmers have time to adapt, amybe like 80% needs to be exported and then each year this threshold is lowered by 5%, if we include protections for Ukrainian farms to be bought up during thsi tranisition period it should work out, it make sthe impact on the market lower, while still pressuring the farmers to change or go bust.
I perosnally hate the common European agricultural Policiy, farmers shouldnt have this much power in my opinion, Ukrainian grain is a good way to also reclaim former farmland in the EU and use it as new green land, reforesting etc. it allows us to lower our carbon impact make western Europe more resilient againgst climate change and pushes our agriculture to develope or specialize more while ukrainian farmerts gain more money which can be used to rebuild ukraine and devolope their industry to be even stronger. If urkaine were able to feed all of ewurope we would have one less problem for climate change to worry about in th near future even better if it allows us to lower carbon impact and maybe even export this cheap food to struggeling places and lower prices stabilizing these regions and increasing EU influence there to help us promote democracy and relations.
@@XOFInfantryman Creating trade deals reduces tensions and the risk of war, and if war where to break out we simply stop shipping grain.
@@21preend42They let Brazil and Argentina (both right in the US's
backyard) do that, and Europe can assert it's interests far better than developing Latin American nations. I admit it's not a perfect idea to sell China cheap grain, as any trade with that regime is problematic, but anything that will help Ukraine build back has to be considered. And China is only one potential partner.
Farmer protectionism is a global reality. Maybe it's not so bad; it's important for food prices to be stable. A reliable food supply is the basis of civilization.
The problem is also creating a vulnerable dependency on imports of vital resources from just one country. Germany just had to learn a harsh lesson on that subject.
*laughs in american with out infinite supply of farm subsidies and supply of cheap slave labor from central & south America*
In general I'm for open markets, but I have to admit that food production is a bit different. I think a lot of farming would be out competed in my country without any subsidies and tariffs on other countries, which might be good for the consumer in some ways, but if any unforeseen event happens that hinder the import of the food, there would be food shortages and possibly starvation. I guess it's a trade off between market efficiency and market stability.
I fear that Dutch agricultural corporations are buying up too much Romanian land and are turning our farmers into cheap labour force that is forced out of Romania. I fear the west is using the east only for its advantage, as it did with its ports until now, in the detriment of again eastern ports.Rotterdam kept getting bigger while ports like the ones on the Black Sea which have now proven to have been of use to Ukraine are still in shambles. Strange times ahead.
Did you forget Damen Shipyards invested in Galati?
So why does romanian farmer sell their land?
@@skeolang7758when you are driven out of business, while also being economically brought on your knees, what do you expect would happen?
Large Dutch/US corporations offer absurd sums of money by local standards (which *are* just yellow pennies for them), to ensure that all local producers would be permanently removed out of the market.
Keep in mind that local farmers can't possibly compete with them regardless of everything.
@@peterdenov4898 if you will take a look on Ukrainian farmers structure, you will see, that majority of the market are large agroholdings that can compete with worldwide companies.
Secondly, small landlords can lease their land (like me), not necessarily sell.
Small farmer always will be out the competition, because he doesn't have the scale effect
Lol laughing in africa
I always get so happy when kraut uploads! He always has a great history lesson that reflects the modern situation.
I am not European, however I wish that you Europeans are able to solve this problem in a good way. I love your continent, it is my favorite one, so I hope for peace to come soon and for prosperity to reign supreme. Good luck to you all.
Thank you! Good luck to you too :)
Thanks for the kind words, I hope so too! May I ask where you are from?
There is no such thing as a european
@@fusionreactor7179 what?
The last time Europe prospered too much we got colonisation.
Ukraine joining would be far more destabilizing than any other previously mentioned example simply due to the scale of production & the low prices Ukranians are already accustomed to. The wealthier states can for sure recover and adapt over time, however, the former eastern bloc states that are much poorer can have their economies & public financial system severel disturbed that it is a question if they'll be able to recover. Although sympathetic to Ukraine, they can not be let into the EU before serious agricultural & systematic reform, otherwise we can all be screwed.
As a Pole, Ukrainians I know are some of the best people among my colleagues. Humble, quiet, with sense of humor and big hearts.
True, agree, but on the other hand - there are nazis from Ukraine that worship those who perpetueted Genocide of Wołyń. I see their full of antipolish comments everydey, if I go to Ukrianian matierial on RUclips. I wonder - how it is - on one hand Ukrainians behave like us, on personal level there is no tentions. Still often i read that killing Polish children was necessary act of decolonisation. Which is on big b....t in a first place, since Poles in for instance Małopolska Wschodnia were indigenous people (as Norman Davies written i "Gods Playgrond".). But really - if to Wołyń Poles came 800 years ago - does it give upa right to kill, usually after tortures, Poles, starting from chldren ,to make parents suffer more? Cowards with no honor from UPA chosen not to attacked Germans, becouse it may cose some wounds or even death - so they chosen to "bravery fight with babies. On the other hand - nor did Poles smth simillar to Ukrainian or any other puplation, neither f.e. Belarussian did same to Poles.
I wonder - is becuse most Ukrainians are truly great antibanderstis, and only loud minority is vocal to protet nazism an that symbolik (red-black flag, gierojom slava - both stareted to be use in 1943. Gierojom slava is in traslation "hail to the heroes" and was refernce to the nazi German - you know which call.
Just a question on this, have you ever watched clarksons farm? It does a pretty good job of showing how the British farming industry is flat out unprofitable, and the government's half measures and loss of subsidies from Europe have pushed British farmers to either sell up or sell at a massive loss. In the UK, it opened up the discussion of farming and I would reccomend it as a thing to watch to show a potential future for Europe if it isn't careful with how it deals with Ukrainian membership
Have you considered the possibility that Britain is just a hellhole?
British farming is unprofitable at current land values. Once half the unprofitable farms sell at a loss the remaining, twice as large, farms will make money. A 4000ha wheat farm in england is much more productive than a 4000ha wheat farm in Australia.
@@mabamabam Yeah, except English farmland aren't really well suited for farming in large industrial scale when fields are small, weirdly shaped and not flat enough to use truly massive machinery. So even if a corp buys up all the land and replot the fields they would still be having difficulty to scale up as much as they can in the US or Australia. Granted, corporate industrial farming would still be more profitable than the current state, but it's going to find it hard to compete against the rest of Europe that runs on similar regulations but more scaleability or countries outside of Europe that farms on less strict regs and thus lower cost. And that's excluding the problems with NIMBYs everywhere.
Kissinger is dead, Zeihan is leaving Twitter for good, _and_ there's a new Kraut video? This is a great day for geopolitics RUclips.
9:06 EVANGELION REFERENCE IN KRAUT VIDEO OH MY GOD
Greeting from Netherlands. It's amazing how consistently you're able to weave together historical and political perspectives, all relevant to an intriguing story that has a clear message about what we should do in the future. Thanks a lot and keep it up!
As a European leftist who is favoring the deregulation of markets, for the sake of lowering food costs... that shift is something I've noticed, and its fascinating to see right wingers argue for regulation and protectionism, and opposed by social democrats and socialists, who then argue for freer markets.
European politics are often so silly, frustrating, and deeply interesting.
I mean getting all your food cheaply from another country makes your country unstable.
Thats such an uneducated take. And also who tf are the leftiats that want ukraine in the EU? I havent met one yet. The only people i can see who are interested are big companies who see a new cheap labor market and idiots who want ukraine to join to spite ruzzia
@@attilamarics3374 Generally, food surplus keeps countries stable, with food pressure as a #1 source of instability. As long as that other country cannot threaten you with the food, it improves stability. So, if you wrap that other country in a deep binding institution that prevents separation, importing cheap food is good for stability.
@@Descolata But that country wont sell you that food in many cases. As we could see. Your comment is idiotic.
I think it's mostly because the old left collapsed in most countries. It still held powerful institutional structures though, and reinvented itself, generally by mixing itself with rightwing features.
In response to that vacuum, the 'new right' emerged, which is arguably better defined as actually left-wing. The old left likes unions (i.e. institutions) while the new right tends to favor the workers.
At this point, the binary is completely useless: "populist right", "populist left" and "establishment" in a triangle, are a more functional model. Socialists, in my experience, increasingly favor the new-right. Neo-socialists tend to collaborate with the new left.
Probably quite different in your country. Here, both the "left" and the old "right" are closer to mercantilist factions warring over which multinationals get your taxpayer money and favoring regulating the shit out of everything (which oddly tends to help out their favored multinationals. A coincidence, surely). They likewise have different lists of captive institutions. While the new-right favors patriotism, isolationism and to some extent an actual free market within in it.
But the new right is still rather a loose coalition of people who are sick of the establishment, so there's a lot of variation within it.
Ukraine was exporting many of their ag products to Africa and the Middle East. The reason their dumping their ag products into neighboring EU nations is because they can't export anything via their Black Sea ports and their aren't direct rail links to ports in those countries. Once the war is over I would imagine they'd go back to exporting to Africa and the Middle East.
Well ships have returned to the ports of Greater Odesa despite russian efforts so the situation is slightly better now (Danube ports still remain the most secure export route). But rail situation is indeed bad as we have a different track gauge than the rest of Europe.
Kissinger dies and kraut just happens to upload a video the next day…..interesting
The world is healing.
As a Polish Femboy, this worries me. If there is less need for polish agricultural products, then that will lead to uncertainty, uncertainty will lead to stress, stress leads to coping, and many cope by being cute. There will be a flood of already saturated femboy market and i will be pushed out of competition. I might have to end up finding some unrelated work to keep me afloat. Perhaps even becoming a farmer
Dzień sznura blisko pe
Can't you be a femboy farmer? Just need a nice pair of dungarees to go with the thigh highs!
Greetings from Ukraine.
Ukrainian Agriculture will definitely change in coming years, mostly because how many fields touched by war. Demining them will not be quick or cheap.
And not only agriculture market will change but also IT, weapons, and energy sectors. Job market will be way more competitive.
Structural changes will touch everyone in EU sooner or later, no matter with or without Ukraine as an actual member.
This is the way of progress and growth...
I just hope we will restore our country&borders and this cycle of terror will end in my land
The thing that crippled the Haitian rice farming industry was “The Caribbean Basin Initiative” (described in this video). But it was a trade initiative initiated by the 1983 Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), and came into effect on January 1, 1984.
So what does Bill Clinton, who took office 10 years later in 1993, have to do with it?
You forgot to mention that the majority of Ukrainian soil is already in foreign ownership. I'm not talking about the parts under Russian rule though.
Source?
@@chsgrate5362 He made it the fuck up
@@chsgrate5362Ukrainian farmlands are rented by transnational corporations mostly for 49 years . This is pretty known fact on Ukriane
@micindir4213 and how much in percentage do foreign companies own
I hope Ukraine can recover pretty quickly from when the war is finally over.
Also I got a nice little lesson on geography and environmental chemistry.
Depending on the outcome of the war, there may not be an independent Ukraine anymore
They won’t Starve thats for sure.
All that metal scarp from the War
Will add Iron to the soil.
Even before of the war Ukrainian demographics were in terrible shape and this war hasn't helped one bit. Quite the opposite. Ukraine joining EU will just add another dying country to the list of dying countries.
@@IamaCosmonaut And I suppose your country is absolutely not dying at all that you think you have the right for such broad bs statements, lol?
before the war 2022 or before war 2014 and loss of Crimea ? because at that time Ukraine lost 20% of GDP and now another 15% of GDP....@@IamaCosmonaut
Best thing for Ukraine was to stay neutral and trade their goods with both east and west. But too late for that. And reality is, Ukraine will never be equal to the rest of us in EU, because they have no bargaining power anymore. Russia has completely blocked them and the only place Ukraine can export is EU. So what are they gonna do if we don't want to pay them a fair price for their goods? Are they gonna let their goods rot rather than take pennies for them?
Ukraine stayed neutral in the 1990s and the period was characterized by Russian meddling in the Ukrainian politics. Neutrality means being unprotected from Russian aggression. Please educate yourself
Few caveats:
1) the issue with Ukrainian agriculture is not only the relative advantage of black soils but also the ownership structure: in countries like Hungary, Romania or Poland most gains, vegetables etc. is produced by small to medium sized farmers while in Ukraine it is owned by few agricultural holdings. This way utilising the economies of scale and disproportionate influence over markets they can annihilate farmers form other countries and force smaller EU members (like say Slovakia) into a relation of dependence.
2) currently with EU borders open to Ukrainian grains, Ukrainian farmers(and remember we’re talking about multinationals here) get an enormous advantage since they don’t need to worry about any competition on their internal market and they aren’t subject to European agricultural practice standards.
Nothing that chemical fertilizers can't solve. American agriculture can still hold their own the same way Texas held out against Venzuela dumping oil for pennies onto the global market.
"agricultural holdings" is a typical Polish propaganda that has nothing to do with reality. after the collapse of the usSR, state agricultural land was divided among villagers, as these villagers were the owners of this land until 1921. Over the years, old people died and left their land as an inheritance to their children and grandchildren. it is impossible to sell this land, as there is no legal mechanism for selling in Ukraine, so this land is leased to farmers. ukrainian farmers are usually small entrepreneurs who lease land in one to five villages. There are also large farming companies with state-of-the-art equipment and technologies, but their market share is no more than 20%. there are also intermediary companies that buy crops from small and medium-sized farmers and export them abroad, mainly to Asia and Africa. At the same time, Ukrainian farmers, unlike Polish farmers, do not receive any subsidies from the country's budget.
so, Polish farmers are losing the market struggle where the competitor gives consumers a more affordable price and blames agroholdings for some reason, not their own unprofitable business model.
I think it’s fair to say that much of the corruption can be traced back to the Soviet era. But regardless, it’s important that we have a sober view on how corrupt Ukraine is relative to the rest of the EU, especially
Western/Northern Europe. The fact that Ukraine does not have a long lineage of respect for individual freedoms and rule of law should also be viewed thru a sober view. It’s concerning for good reason, and those things will have to be addressed and worked on
That's funny to read with current Slovakia's leadership, for example.
@danielhalachev4714 that’s a good point. I’d have to agree with u
@@ayararesara6253 not entirely sure what that comment is supposed to achieve
@@JM-qb2kd EU countries are tolerant to corruption as well.
@@ayararesara6253 I would agree. The EU definitely does contain nations that struggle with corruption. But that doesn’t mean they should add even more of them.. that’ll of course be left up to Europe to decide. I just think that the situation with Ukraine needs to be addressed honestly. I do t think it’s wise to paint it as a bastion of liberal democracy.
A Polish historian here. This video treats Ukrainian farmers as if Ukrainian agrarian economy was completly dominated by small farmers. Which shows a complete lack of research on your part. For anyone who would like to actually learn more about Ukrainian grain, I encourage you to read my comment further, my sources will be linked below unlike Krauts sources, since I think here he just made shit up because simple googling would tell him how does the Ukrainian structure of farmland ownership looks like . The Ukrainian agriculture like any other Ukrainian market is dominated by a select few agricultural companies that completly control the Ukrainian agriculture. [1] The country's agriculture is run completly through these companies and also a few select foreign corporations that have enough money for lawyers that can find legal loopholes to extend the ban on sale of land between 2001 and 2016. The goverment functionally run by oligarchs had no ability or political will to prevent the centralisation of Ukrainian agriculture, and now since Zelensky's goverment has pursued a policy of extensive privatisation [2], it doesn't seem like the Zelensky's priority is a reaquistion of illegally bought land.
So why does this matter to the larger point of the video? Well, Kraut's whole thesis is that the subsidies to European farmers are going to hurt small and independent Ukrainian farmers, that are implied to be the majority of owners of agricultural land. The problem is that as I have proven before, this is not true. So the whole thesis falls apart, since agricultural subsidies are exactly what would hurt the corporations that are the majority of landowners of Ukraine and would give power back to small, regular farmers. The subsidies as a political tool has been used exactly in this way, in the EU since it's inception since many agrarian parties didn't want to compromise their voting block, and so European agriculture remains largely owned by small family farms. [3]
This only shows how little research goes into his videos, since such basic information is incredibly easy to find. Or he simply created the video, as typical liberal propaganda piece meant to show the viewer the "wonders" of free market. It's anyone's guess.
Sources:
1. www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/Brief_CorporateTakeoverofUkraine_0.pdf
2. www.reuters.com/world/europe/buoyed-by-sale-small-state-assets-ukraine-eyes-bigger-sell-off-2023-05-11/
3. ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/SEPDF/cache/73319.pdf
I like finding comments that go into detail about topics in the video that they didn't really discuss in 👌
as a Ukrainian I agree with you. Most Ukrainians unfortunately do not benefit from the rich lands since as you said a few oligarchs own it all. Therefore, I personally would not feel bad if they all go bankrupt because to be honest. They do a terrible job with the preservation of land, employee wellbeing and even production efficiency.
Pin this comment yo
"the "wonders" of the free market"? i got the impression that if you have to hold back what SHOULD BE a human right because people would suffer, the current system could either be improved (not happening under capitalism lolol) or replaced
anyway how do i link comments? i wanna share yours around
His overall point is still correct. Whether it's a large farm or a small farm, Ukrainian agriculture poses risks to Europe. And heavy European subsidies will create problems for Ukraine.
My grandmother always says that the reason for Russia's invasion is the conquest of the Ukrainian black earth. Her opinion is probably based on the stories of her grandfather, who fought in Romania and Ukraine during WW1 and said that the local farmers harvested much larger crops with less effort compared to Bavaria.
No one knows what Russian empire's goals are
@@user-tn1pf5fp2bRF is as Russian Empire as Romania is to Rome. All aristocracy in RE was killed in 20ies. Literally, ethnic structure changed between 1890 and 1930. USSR denied any legacy from RE. RF accepted USSR legacy which denied RE legacy.
8:24 That picture is pure gold.
Something important to mention here that was left out.
Ukraine also supplies alot of its current agricultural produce to the developing world. Including places where food scarcity is already pretty acute due to geography.
So a collapse of Ukrainian agriculture would have horrible implications for global hunger on the whole. Russia's blockade has already made things pretty bad. But not as bad as they could be.
Maybe that'll stop them from reproducing as much.
@@Lilliathi it will literally lead to the opposit
Ukraine is NOT integrated into the EU and they can't sell their agricultural goods to European consumers. The only thing that they sold was animal feed to a few countries. The EU was allowing transporting agricultural goods through the EU because of the black sea blockade. How can you make such a massive blunder? You don't gain access to the single market just like that.
Hello from Ukraine! Thank you for speaking the truth! 🇺🇦
Our chernozem is our greatest blessing and our greatest curse...
Thank you for the video and thank you for supporting Ukraine.
Russia already won
@@ffff7164good joke. International pariah, sanctioned, failed to take over Ukraine even after nearly 2 years of fighting, hundreds of thousands of young people leaving, hundreds of thousands of young people dying, increasingly authoritarian government, increasing lack of human rights, etc.
that's a funny way of "winning", if you ask me.
@@noaoah3662sorry, but why you says that Ukraine failed to take over Ukraine?
I, for one, cannot wait to try Polish wagyu
lol. same
Apparently Tinder is attempting an Austro-Hungarian restoration.
There is a famous saying about business thinking that says:
"Communists when there are losses and very capitalist when there are profits"
Socialize losses and privatize profits.
The funny thing is that there’s a discurse going on here in Brazil that the reason mercosul-EU deal is taking so long to be reached is bc of our agriculture are too competitive for European farmers.
That is actually the reason. The French (and the German Meat farmers) Farmers will be cucked by your meat production, which is why they throw a hissy fit. In general, european farmers are very dependent in subsidies already, in my Country, almost 50% of their income is from EU subsidies, which Act in a soft planned agriculture. Which is why our agricultural sector is a Big mess.
Organic matter is primarily storage FOR nutrients via increase surface area, it doesn’t contain that much by itself.
Great job though!
I think one thing that is important to consider that was left out of the video is the stability that comes from having farmers within your own country. For example, Switzerland has had the lowest level of food inflation in all of the EU because they have protected their farmers from lower cost imports. When the supply chain was interupted in 2020, they haven't had to bat an eye about food prices because most of it is made in state anyways. Now that we have seen what can happen even from a minor, temporary supply chain disruption, I think it is important for us to consider what a more serious, long term supply chain disruption could do to the price and availability of food within a country.
Then again, prices in Switzerland are on their own very high
@@Fruzhin5483 No need to increase food prices, when food prices are already high ;)
There was also a CSIS talk about this topic 2 months ago. If i remember correctly, one of the takeaways was that the rest of the world food market is large enough for Ukraine. Restrictions on this specific category would therefore be acceptable for both while openness in the rest of the economy would benefit both.
I am from Ukraine. Thank you so much for this video!
Fun fact about Italians farmers and breeders: they can’t possibly survive without subsidies.
This is especially true in the northern parts of Italy (I happen to know the president of the south agricultural park of Lombardy) and even more so because no matter what happens, no one wants to modernize or change anything about their ways of production. The CAP (common agricultural policy) is also shrinking the subsidies to innovating farmers and giving them as normal subsidies that costs us 300k euros PER COMPANY. The EU is doubly ignoring that soon or later Ukraine will join the union.
2:35 Kraut being embarrassed about only being bilingual when most Americans are half way to being monolingual in English
Hello love the video it was quite interesting, and as a farm in New Zealand we have made 2 big mistakes that have really hurt a biggest market dairy. Our first big mistake was giving way our farming secretes to Chinese business because now they out produces us here in New Zealand, so now we can no longer sell to Chinese markets which was one the biggest markets we sold to and now it is closed of to use. The secound mistake we made was letting Fonterra become the "monopoly" they are today (Fonterra own 90% of the dairy market) so they are really the only one Dairy farmers can sell to but Fonterra only see it farms now as numbers so the treat them like sh*t and now a lot of our dairy farms are transitioning to beef farming so my country largest business Dairy is on a decline in the midst of a recession that could even turn in to a depression if we are not careful.
Thanks to all who read my rant on dairy farming hope you enjoyed it.
New Zealand seems like it could benefit from a larger home grown cheese industry. I remember there wasn't too much local cheese when I was over there, and what there was was mostly clones of more famous European cheeses. NZ could create more of their own cheese varieties, and I think they could do very well. Cheese is also a fantastic way to increase your milk profits, the value added markup on cheese can be immense.
@@Croz89 I
I have heard that some farmers down I the south island have started to make their own chesses but it won't probably take off because of it try to break in to a market already dominated by other cheese company
@@contentofdummys405 If they try to copy what the cheese company already makes, sure. The trick would be to make something different. That does take time and creativity, it won't be an instant win, but it could pay off very well in the long run.
@@Croz89 The thing is that requires money, money most farms don't have
My dude Kraut, you made this whole video without mentioning the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement that's about to be signed this December. European markets are about to be flooded by the Brazilian, Argentinian, Uruguayan and Paraguayan agricultural output combined. Ireland and France opposed the deal every step of the way because they know once it's signed their non-luxury agri sector will be dead. Just Argentina and Brazil alone dwarfs in scale any EU country when it comes to agriculture. Thrown in Ukraine alongside Mercosur and all of Western and Central Europe industrial farmland will be over.
Yeah, if the deal is approved mercosur agricultural output is 7 times the output of Ukraine, after the war with Ukraine joining the storm to EU farms would already have passed
Which is what the EU wants. Hence why they are stiffeling west Eu farmers with bs nitrogen limits that will just relocate the nitrogen to less effecient places in east europe or south america
Finally! It makes no sense to grow wheat and non-luxury agri goods in europe, the rest of the world is much cheaper and the money and workers freed by this collapse can then go to more profitable sectors
What I don't get in this whole argument is (except for concervative autofellation) why TF western and central Europe clings so much to it's non-luxury agriculture. It's not food security, because it's already dependent on subsidies so much it would collapse if shit hits the fan hard enough to threaten imports.
It's barely more then a rounding error in the GDP. And it's abhorrently inefficient.
Destroying your own agriculture sector seems very short sighted. I don't like it.
Kraut: Embarrassingly, I speak English and German. I also read some French…
Meanwhile, Brits: 🤪
4:41 Huh, never realized the black soil in my backyard was special, but I guess that kind of explains why our home garden does so well…
In my newspaper about 20yrs ago it said there was a land grab in Ukraine by large European Agricultural Corps like The Co- Op (vertically integrating supply chains) from the UK. I've no idea how their ownership and imports into Europe were handled. Perhaps it bares scrutiny
Great video, although it overlooks one major thing - the security issue. No sane country will ever willingly destroy its own agricultural sector to the point that it can no longer reliably feed itself. And this is especially true after the COVID crisis, which revealed that European solidarity and cooperation disintegrate pretty quickly when push comes to shove.
Specializing and making some cheeses is nice, but if the global food trade gets disrupted and food becomes scarce, it will not do the starving population much good.
I don't mind letting Ukraine join.
But shouldn't there be a conversation to balance the needs of European farmers and Ukrainian farmers.
Instead of saying we need to be equal seems kind of reductionist to me.
Lowering food prices seems good but we should also protect the farmers jobs to some degree.
The whole point of the video, imo, is to show that Eastern Bloc countries benefitted from the equal treatment and there weren't tariffs imposed on them, which in turn took a toll on a west-EU farmers.
And for the beneficiaries to say: "Yep we need tariffs" - but they didn't have to have them on their products back when they joined the EU, is a hypocrisy.
Moreover, some of the countries, which had a competent leadership, such as Poland and Czechia, used all this money to innovate and improve the economy and Ukraine needs it as much.
@@mamai_eth
It is a hypocritical yes,
But that doesn't remove the fact that farmers will lose there businesses without tariffs. I don't know what to do but those (EU) farmers won't ever support Ukraine joining the EU unless we accommodate there needs somehow,
@@rob2540
Farmers of France, Germany and Italy had sacrificed their business to bring in the Eastern Bloc countries.
If now they don't want to sacrifice, those farmers of France and Germany may very well come up with an argument that their sacrifice was for nothing, they didn't get the much cheaper products and they lost the market and the business. And start advocating for subsidies in their respective countries, which would lead the Eastern Bloc countries to lose the market they optimized for, for the last 20 years.
This might sound a bit naive, but couldn't governments in countries with less competitive grain production start mandating a certain minimum % of domestic grain that their millers, bakeries and supermarkets have to buy when purchasing grain products?
Heres a fun maths exercise. Look up your local wheat price and work out how much the wheat in a cheap loaf of bread is worth. I got about 7%. You could have free grain and the price of bread wouldn’t change much, the cost is mostly processing and logistics.
Almost fell from my chair laughing at the part about "breadbasket of empires". Man, both Ancient Greece and Rome colonized primarily Crimea, and not for the grain. Attributing Athens might to Crimean colonies is laughable, and for Rome it was such a far away province that no one actually cared about it. FYI: actual breadbaskets for Rome: Egypt, Africa, Sicilia.
Kievan Rus benefited more from North-South trade route than from its own exports. Some resemblance of a "breadbasket" starts from PLC, but that notion in itself assumes certain degree of separation between the "empire" and this province, which somewhat was true for PLC, but definitely false for Russian Empire, which viewed Malorossia as an integral part of the Empire.
The 1980s crisis that you mention wasn't just Spain, although they are much bigger. It also happened in Portugal, we had to dismantle most of our agriculture to enter the EU.
I agree we must treat Ukraine differently than all those that came before and they must be an equal partner like all the rest. Their black soil is a geographic advantage as much as sun should be to the southern countries. It's just a natural resource that can be harnessed. By them.
That is a tricky situation.
Taking away the subsidies risks putting domestic farmers out of business.
Leaving them in place would put Ukraine at a second class member status.
Helping European farmers switch to fewer and more expensive crops and livestock might work….
Farm subsidies were killed off in New Zealand with the result being that our farmers compete happily with the rest of the world. Look up Frontera dairy.
@@kevinansley7353
Short term pain long term gain.
At least so goes the hope.
Bear in mind that in Europe some of these farms are centuries old.
@@kevinansley7353new zealand competes only for wool and lamb.
Because they have low density and lots of grassy plains.
This model wouldn t work for other countries and climate change puts it in jeopardy.
No problem in and of itself when farmers go out of business, as long as it's gradual. The most innovative ones find good niches that work for them, and end up taking over the failed ones. Since necessarily the imported produce is cheaper (otherwise, no problem anyway), everyone benefits from lower prices.
With subsidies you pay less in the store, but you pay the other half in taxes (or, benefits not given since there was no money left).
But two problems. One is that you end up importing your food, so you're dependent on other countries for your very survival. Should those relations go bad...
Second problem: this assumes governments don't try to micro-manage how the economy should work. And we have no pesticide that works particularly well on politicians.
@@sorsocksfakeIt really depends on if the land still has utility. If the land is now completely unprofitable to farm, it can become at best cost neutral and at worst an economic burden on the nation.
As an Ukrainian our history and geography teachers have absolutely opposite moods, about Ukrainian history and geography. Like one of the best geography and one of the most horrific histories.
Paradoxically the more your blessed geographically it seems the worst things go historically, I think that's why Switzerland is so rich. if your geographically blessed you get jealous neighbors or if your latin América or africa, Generals who keep making themselves military dictators and use mining money to stay in charge.
Best geography in what way? It's just a steppe with lots of river in most of of the country
@@vitaliitomas8121 The best agricultural territories, lots of iron, coal marganeese ore, nickel, black and brown peat, a bit of Gas, and oil, a lot of stone salt, and a lot of different things but not in the same quantity.
Like Ukraine was top 10 steel produser before 2014 and top 15 till 2022.
Most of Sulfur in the world, second most of cinnabar (mercury ore). Do i need to continue?
@@vitaliitomas8121 just a step? in ukraine there is not only steppe, but also mountains, forests, hills, a huge amount of resources, and much more, and why then because of some simple steppe with a large number of rivers, they tried to capture everyone who lived near Ukraine and those who lived quite far away
in our geography we have Russia(
But author forgot to mention that those land was already sold to transnational corporations and ukraine won't get any profit from them🤭
Something that caught my eye was that the Dutch Farmers Party(the ones that blockaded the roads and cities a while back) do not oppose the Ukrainian membership to the EU. In their plans, they mention that Ukraines requirements are not met, but they want to keep the option for them to join open. And then they briefly mention they want to intensify the collaboration between Dutch and Ukrainian agricultural sectors. Either they mean this cynically like kraut lays out at 10:14 . Which is not unthinkable because they have very close ties to the big farming companies. But it could also mean they are literally not thinking the consequences through of a Ukraine membership. In either case, not the best look.
If ukrainian foodstuffs are more competatively priced than that of other european farmers, than it is the responsibility of the latter to find ways to improve their own production so that they can compete. while at the same time it is the responsibility of ukraine to temper their relationship with the rest of the E.U in regards to agriculture so that relations dont sour in a way that will drag down the ukrainian people in the long term. and ultimately it is the responsibility of all parties involved to determine what relationship will be most beneficial in the long term.
😂
The problem with the US-Haiti example isn't that free trade is a bad thing, the eventual goal is free trade between all countries, and farmers lose their jobs as countries develop because they move to other fields, in 1700 90% of Americans were farmers and today 1% are, and we don't want to go back. The problem is that Haitian society wasn't ready for a lot of farmers to take up new jobs, this led to more unemployment as the farmers didn't have options.
Edit: also the US probably shouldn't subsidize agriculture
Whose goal is free trade, again?
It wasn't that the Haitians weren't ready, it was that they were sold a story by the US government which then proceeded to pull a UNO reverse card by artificially pushing their own prices down to crush a competitor. So yes, the free trade in this example was the bad thing.
What? How? This is directly an example of a situation where there were no other fields and noone had any excess capital to create them either. All they have left is a capital-vacuum of crime, hungry mouths and cheap labor. Developing other fields takes money and time, they have no money to invest into education, nor to build factories - all they have is dirt cheap labor and foreign capital can get that from other, more stable countries. (Though their stability often comes from authoritarian dictatorships.)
@@CidVeldoril saying Haiti wasn't ready doesn't mean it's their fault, they were treated poorly by colonizing powers, but yes they weren't ready to get outcompeted by US markets. The trade deal's effects are just a symptom of Haiti's larger problem, that it hasn't been given opportunity to grow in other fields that aren't rice farming. The US has the world's largest fertile area but it's rich today because it diversified and only 1% of Americans are farmers.
Where they supposed to learn to code and take up jobs in Haitis thriving tech sector? Of course the problem was free trade. Tariffs exist for a reason. If free trade did not enter the chat the problem would not exist cause:effect
It jsut means we in the EU trying to prevent a Haiti happening in our countries. That is all, put a import tariff on Ukraine, should be one of the conditions of joining the EU.
One question I had during this video is: who are these famers that are mentioned so much?
Because farmer isn't some homogenous class of people. There's a world of difference between small to medium scale family farms and huge scale monoculture export oriented agribussiness, and so little applies to both eqaully or even similarly. In my country brazil, at least, around 70% of food consumed in households is produced by small to medium family properties. while agribusiness is mainly oriented to exportation. A measure that impacted agribusiness wouldn't be much of a loss because such properties employ few workers and contibute very, very little in terms of taxes for the country's budget, all the while destroying the environment in many ways.
In New Zealand (where I live), we completely opened up our markets, and the farmers became more prosperous and more productive as they focussed on exporting. The EU should stop being so protectionist with trade it's ridiculous that I can buy EU products with no Tariff added but EU consumers can't get cheaper products because they have to protect unproductive industries.
*Uncompetitive industries. If we stopped protecting them, the end result is losing all of the manufacturing and all of the agriculture to the big multinational capital that has the resources to outsource and automate their production. Without any protectionism, Finnish agriculture would be gone, because we simply don't get as much sunlight as countries further south. Is that in our benefit? Being unable to manufacture or farm anything? No it isn't. Thanks to globalization and wealth concentrating to the hands of the few, the global economy is getting more and more competitive to such extent that a larger and larger percentage of people are unable to compete. Global markets are weighed against the small guy and the local industry. When these industries die out, so will the know-how, the machinery and the cumulative tradition. I don't know about the specific circumstances around New Zealand agriculture, but I very much doubt their solution can be applied to every other nation and their industries.
I know this isn't what you mean, but certain parts of this video give of the same vibe as when journalists told West Virginian coal miners to just learn coding when they lost their jobs.
Do we _have_ to still use coal way beyond all its economic, energy and environmental viability just to keep miners employed?
There is 0 benefit to take ukraine in atm. Would be a romania 2.0 just even worse. The only ones who would benefit are eu corporations that can suck ukraine dry of cheap labor. EU already forwent its strict membership laws for the eastern expansion and it brought a lot of problems with it that we still feel today. We shouldn't let a corrupt semi democratic country in that easily
@@090giver090 should we simply dismiss another's needs cause it's easier or beneficial for yours
Coal has more uses than just energy production, bub.
@@bisque6448 Other uses of coal don't require as much coal so industry can't be sustained at the size of its haydays.
"Now Ukraine owns it's land" lol no. Check how land ownerships is structured and who is the owner, massive oligopolies owning hundreds thousands of square meters mostly by western corporations or some Ukrainian oligarchs. There is no such thing as small private farms in Ukraine.
No shit, 'small private farms' as a phenomenon were practically destroyed by collectivization back in XX century. Why it's a problem?
@@ayararesara6253 The problem is that 90% of it is in foreign hands, not Ukraine's lmao
@@GoodieMartin Foreigners are prohibited from buying agriculture lands without all-ukrainian referendum first.
You have a great mind Kraut, thank you for putting it to good use.
It is difficult to say that Ukraine has wanted to be in the EU for decades, because this history only began with the Maidan. It was Türkiye that wanted to join the EU from the very beginning.
As Czech I agree with everything You said and the sentiment behind it.
For now let’s help Ukraine in every way possible (Slava Ukraini!) and for future let’s think about the most fair way possible to invite and welcome Ukraine in our midst.
@Tigran-Abazyan It is problem. And very biig one. Hardly anyone knows what to do.
EU never predicted, that there will be someone akin to enemy as one of the constituent nations of EU.
Loong screening before accepting should have taken care of it (assuming country cannot backslide from democracy to shitocracy, that was wrong)
So there are not levers. Or there is the one article nr.7 with limited voting, I thing that might help (Orban would use it as propaganda machine probably)… the other is to wait on still existing elections and hope for change (while Orban commands media)
As a Romanian I want to say that our farms are already in a bad situation, so if we get completly killed by Ukraine, that will be terrible and sad for how good our foods can be when are done good, and I can say the same for Bulgaria, Poland or Hungary
Well you missed the fact that Ukrainian corruption make it worse - recently corruption scandal (Ok I admit that there is at least 1 a week recently so you might loose track) where it turned out that Ukrainians were smuggling their wheat into EU but it wasn't only quality below EU standard (and remind you one of the fact that EU grain is more expencive is due to quality regulations) but it was also below ukrainian quality standard. And that's also huge problem.
Really mind boggling a RUclipsr has to bring these to light and there are probably dozens of politicians with thumbs stuck up their bums worrying about their upcoming vacations instead.
Farmers are a tiny minority in most European countries, while lower food prices benefits FAR MORE people! The bigger the EU the better!
Thank you for another fine upload. This problem doesn't seem new to me, Europe has been equalizing it's internal economy north-south through farming subsidies for a long time. It won't be very popular in the mediterranean countries, but the transfer of wealth will have to change west-east and the grain issue will be only one of many issues that we've dealt with before. Cheap labour will be just as problematic I think, just as it was when many eastern countries joined EU. It seems to work out though.
For EU as a whole; incorporating the most valuable farmland in the world is a clear net-plus if you ask me. Taking responsibility for a poor and war-ravaged Ukraine will be costly but imperative to the european peace-project.
Not sure if is a net plus, do we really need more farmland. I guess Ukraine can use it for heavy exports.
Who else is returning to this video after the farmer's siege of Paris?
Great video, full of insights and food for thought. The only downside is that it makes me pessimistic about Ukraine being admitted in the EU :/
Yeah I'm not seeing how Hungary or France would ever vote them into the EU. After this war is over, whatever the outcome, Ukraine is going to be so reliant on foreign aid, that i can't see it ever happening.
Kraut always teaches me things I didn't know I wanted to know.
Thank you from Kyiv
With all due respect, I dont think Ukraine will be able to join in the foreseeable future. Stemming not only from the current conflict and from the institutions and government, but also due to the fact that it would be too big and difficult to integrate. EU has internal structural problems that need to be solved and adding another country to eat up EU funds wouldn t do the Union any good. There are still member states (Romania and Bulgaria) that aren t allowed into the Schengen zone and yet we are talking about future enlargement ? To me it just seems like political flag waiving. A token of solidarity and nothing more..
Where there is a will there is a way.
Ukraine has the political motivation to rebuild itself as a better nation.
During and after a war a nation can shift its policies and habits drastically.
Not only is rebuilding Ukraine an investment into the future, but can become a significant contributor to the European Union and be a major net contributor.
Romania doesn't have a fire under it to change it's politics of corruption, societal systems, laws and regulations.
Maybe, personnally I think that Ukraine will be the keystone to the begin of a new era for the EU.
@@evanpereira3555how?
At this point 1/5 of Ukraine is already in the EU.
Lowering grain price would dramatically lower the cost of living in EU? Rent and fuel dwarf any food bill, let alone harvested crops. 9:44
I was always under the impression that the US south had the most black soil in the world but turns out that it’s an entirely different kind of soil that’s especially good for certain plants like cottons but not as good for food crops. I love how I always learn new things when I watch Kraut videos even when they are tangential to the subject matter at hand!
One of my favourite RUclips channels - I’ve learnt a lot, time to head over to Patreon…
This is such a dumb problem. A problem of how to avoid cheaper higher quality products.
Isn't agriculture almost like a monopoly? Crazy.
Ukraine basically has about same chance as Turkey to get in the EU. All this talk during the war is just talk
9:20 yeah ask Greece what kind of fairness they got from germany
They took out too much debt? Like how is it Germanys fault they want their money back
@@SandeaterIV Imagine if every european country ask germany his war debts back...
@@Tonyx.yt. what "war debts"
@@SandeaterIV ww2 repayments
Your videos are top notch. Thanks for another.
By the way, the phrase you use at 8:17 should be "for all intents and purposes," and not "intensive purposes." Unless you were joking, which is very funny, if so.
It's a pretty reasonable error, especially for a non-native English speaker. I've always thought it was incredibly strange that such legalese somehow made it into the general lexicon.
We need more like Kraut, who can frame problems in a proper manner, so we then can engage in proper discourse, to come to solutions that will benefit all.
Agricultural subsidies never made sense to me. "Save us from the scourge of cheap food!" they cry.
Ukraine having good soil and therefore being a powerhouse doesn't break the logic of capitalism. The logic of capitalism is that comparative advantage is a good thing. It doesn't matter how that comparative advantage is obtained, whether by technology or luck of geology.
Europe is done for