Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on The Control of the American Sugar Industry. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 5 page paper argues that the government has hurt the economy by trying to manipulate the sugar industry. Bibliography lists 6 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: RT13_SA809sug.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
1812 (Bovard, 1998). As a result, the sugar industry is not very competitive (Bovard, 1998). This is largely a result of trade policy that makes little economic sense (Bovard, 1998).
In part, the state of things today is equated with a history of sugar subsidies, embargos, tariffs and other manipulative tactics which, according to a student, is actually an example
of an inefficient market caused by government interference. It should be noted that early on, the United States did impose high tariffs on sugar and this was to please
growers in Louisiana, which in 1816, was newly acquired (Bovard, 1998). During the 1820s, plantation owners would complain that growing sugar in the U.S. would put them at odds with
nature as the American climate was not conducive to sugar production (Bovard, 1998). Yet, protectionists held that if sugar tariffs were taken away, that would hurt slave values (Bovard, 1998).
The concept of keeping the sugar tariffs in place was tied to economic theory, but in the end, it seems as if the entire concept failed. Later, in 1934, the
American government would impose import quotas on sugar so it could compete with higher priced native sugar (Bovard, 1998). Also at this time, it would provide subsidies for the sugar
growers (Bovard, 1998). By the time 1950 rolled around, the sugar programs in the U.S. was known for its harsh regulations (Bovard, 1998). Sugar quotas were political as well. Bovard
(1998) points out: "Sugar quotas have also provided a safety net for former congressmen, many of whom have been hired as lobbyists for foreign sugar producers." The sugar program has
cost the people more than $3 million for each grower (Bovard, 1998). Those in Congress justify the program as it is thought to protect American farmers from the ups and
...