But Florida sugar farmers thought they needed protection from cheap imported sugar and our elected representatives gave them that.
So lots of candy companies had to move out of the USA, because their #1 ingredient was ARTIFICIALLY too expensive.
But I guess losing Hershey's, Mother's Cookies, See's Candies, etc is a small price to pay to make sure we grow sugar right here in the USA for more than it is worth on the world market!
Worse, the tariffs on imported sugar were sold to credulous Americans as being putting America First, Saving Jobs (dey took er yobs!), etc, etc.
Luckily I don’t care for sweets or desserts and I don’t like chocolate.
But Florida sugar farmers thought ....
******************************************
There’s the problem ... now the jobs are in Mexico and the Florida EPA has shut down the sugar plantations (paid a LOT of money to them for the land too...) ,, now we have no income from the farming , and no related jobs and we have instigated the movement of thousands (or more) jobs out of the country..
It is funny that if you expand out the ramifications of protecting an industry, you find that the industry will eventually be killed.
All the farmers loved ethanol, because the price of corn was inflated to re-reach the equilibrium (more demand, same supply, higher price). Great for them short term. But, with higher US corn prices, companies using corn syrup will go elsewhere, like South America. Then, you have high prices and low demand, which is a terrible combination. Also, with the higher prices, poultry and cow farmers would either have to raise their price to the end customer, or switch to grass or other feeds, which will hurt corn growers.
I think, from what Ive seen, that if you want to protect a sector of the market, you better be ready to protect the entire economy. Having free trade while forcing import tarrifs on certain sectors will lead those sectors away from the country.