>But that is not 'free trade' but protectionism.
>
>You mean the protectionism that prevents more cheap, best-quality New Zealand beef appearing on US tables? ;-)
>
>If there's going to be protectionism, it should be to promote indigenous industry in poor countries that need to develop it. Rich countries using trade barriers to prop up inefficient local producers while imposing penalties if other countries impose reciprocal barriers (e.g. on software or pharmaceuticals) doesn't seem that "fair". JMHO.
>
>FWIW, see http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/01/business/farm.php , in particular the double-speak from the Washington fellow.

Double-speak for sure.
Huge corporate entities are doing farming in the U.S. They buy up farms and keep the former owners to 'manage' the place.
There's only 1 reason why these corporations are into farming at all - the massive subsidies.

I can see the day coming when cows and pigs are frozen whole, sent to China for 'processing' (butchering) and the meat sent back for sale. Sound far-fetched?... The Russians catch salmon and haddock in the Bering Sea, transport the catch to a Chinese port where it is sent deep inand for processing. Then it gets back to a Chinese port and is sent around the world. To get here it has to cross the Pacific, go through the Panama Canal, up the coast of North America to Halifax then by truck to Lunenburg where it is turned into "product of Canada" frozen meals.