Jump to content

Talk:Set-aside

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Someone who didn't sign his ID added :

"Nowadays, as-well as being used for this reason, it is also used to prevent food surpluses."

This is the percieved populist idea. The fact is, there was never a "food surplus". The grain mountains of 20 years ago reflected the reality of the Green Revolution in which increased world food production far outstripped the growth of world population, to the disappointment of the Erlich followers of economic pessimism.

That the corresponding fall in prices nearly bankrupted British farming luckily galvanised the EU to introduce set-aside in 1992 with a view to restoring farmers' income and making better use of taxpayers money.

I stated in the same sentence that set-aside is used as a political measure, there was therefore no need to add this phrase. Please restore or give good reason for its inclusion.Tomcrisp7 01:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Set aside %

[edit]

This article [1] suggests that the set aside was set at 0% this year. Can someone confirm and tidy up please.Derek Andrews (talk) 00:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


In the light of recent world conditions e.g. food price rises, can we have some more contemporary statistics and projections please. Johnnybriggs (talk) 12:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Set-asides in the US

[edit]

I read this passage: "When it comes to issues like affirmative action and set-asides, Obama is anything but the post-racial politician he's sometimes made out to be. Take set-asides. In 1998, Obama endorsed Democratic gubernatorial hopeful John Schmidt, stressing to the Defender Schmidt's past support for affirmative action and set-asides."

What are set-asides in the context of US politics? This article does not answer that question. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 23:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC) I don't feel that this article is relevant to the US, though it was a major issue within the EU at the time. Unfortunatley Wikipedia has a trend of being US-centric, why not ask about set-aside land in India, Botswana or Peru instead? If an article isn't relevant to a country, that country isn't included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.162.194 (talk) 22:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]