▶ Your Answer : In the
reading passage, there is ample supports for the author's claim that there are
three merit about agricultural subsidies for farmer. However, the professor in
the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point. First, the professor contends that
agricultural subsidies cannot result in increasing food supply. When farmer can
produce a lot of food production such as corn through subsidies, they will make
resource like gas by using this product. As a result, increased amount of this
crop yield do not make up for the food supply. This cast doubt on the reading
passage's claim that agriculture are highly affected by weather condition.
Thus, if farmer give agricultural subsidies to government, they can fix the
problem related to whether to use the subsidies so it can serve to increase of
food supply. Next, the professor insists that
actually the price of food will be increased. Farmers usually grow certain crop
such as corn through public assistance. Therefore, the amount of fruit and
vegetable will be reduced, and their price highly increase. This counters the
reading passage's claim that since subsidies can be attributed to cut down the
cost of farming, the price of food can be significantly decreased. Finally, the professor argues that
it is unlikely that subsidies support to economic health in rural area. This is
because the farmers who cultivate large land does not hire a lot of people, but
purchase the equipment. Thus, rural communities cannot experience economic
merit. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that considering that many
farmers can cultivate large amount of land thanks to subsidies, they will hire
much more worker in rural area. As a result, it can give rise of health
economic environment in this region.
|