Great ‘Cheapest Way to Go Fairtrade’ Hunt

robskillz

valiant wrote: »

...At least do a Google on Fairtrade and inform yourself before wasting your money on left-wing idealism.

Harsh, but a fair point in pure capitalism vs. socialism, though possibly over-simplifying things. As mentioned, the fairtrade farmers are guaranteed market value so that they are not exploited by big businesses trying to drive down their costs. But if the market value drops (due to overproduction or lack of demand), wouldn't the fixed price?

bargainbabe16a

PERHAPS YOU SHOULD TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE AND EXAMINE SOME MORE ASSESSMENTS OF FAIR TRADE BEFORE MAKING SUCH SWEEPING GENERALIZATIONS ABOUT ANYONE WHO PURCHASES THESE PRODUCTS!
If you Google Fair Trade you will find a very balanced article from BBCNews/UK/Magazine.The main points that I take from this are;

• ensures farmers receive an agreed and stable price as well as an additional Fairtrade premium to invest in social projects or business development programmes(including education, healthcare,clean water supplies and repair to infrastructure)

The comments from the following contributors sum up my feelings-Neil fron N.I, James from Belfast and Paul in York. Dan from Londons' comments were particularly good-It's always interesting and much more informative to hear from someone who has visited a project helped by Fairtrade rather than simply believing everything that you read in an article.

I love the Co-op generally-not just for their FairTrade items and feel really fortunate to have one only a couple of miles from me in Castlewellan, N.I.
I don't think many exist in N.Ireland!

wall240248

Paignton Zoo are offering 10% off all their fairtrade products in their online shop. www.paigntonzoo.org.uk
Starting on 21st February up to and including Sunday 8th March.

Also all this week they are running fairtrade fever with competitions, displays etc:beer:

valiant

wall240248 wrote: »

Paignton Zoo are offering 10% off all their fairtrade products in their online shop. www.paigntonzoo.org.uk
Starting on 21st February up to and including Sunday 8th March.

Also all this week they are running fairtrade fever with competitions, displays etc:beer:

And, from their accounts, it seems that they received £137,000 from the taxpayer to further political ends like Fairtrade. Well done Gordon Brown!

daddancer

:money:

If you're into Faitrade then check out Fairgift at www.fairgift.com where you can get 10% off everything just until the end of Fairtrade Fortnight (8 March 2009) with the code FTFDISC1

froddington

Sainsbury's TU clothing has some fairtrade plain cotton t-shirts at £3.50 each - nice range of colours. Also, selected stores have 25% off all clothing until Monday.

http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/shoppingandservices/clothing

robbmcr

LIDL do a good line in fair trade certified products too. Bar of dark choc, tastes just like green and black's but half the price. Also coffee and juice.

Ben84

valiant wrote: »

This from The Economist on 7/12/06 : (full article is 'paid' content on The Economist website).

"Fairtrade food is designed to raise poor farmers' incomes. It is sold at a higher price than ordinary food, with a subsidy passed back to the farmer. But prices of agricultural commodities are low because of overproduction. By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other crops and so depresses prices—thus achieving, for most farmers, exactly the opposite of what the initiative is intended to do. And since only a small fraction of the mark-up on Fairtrade foods actually goes to the farmer—most goes to the retailer—the system gives rich consumers an inflated impression of their largesse and makes alleviating poverty seem too easy."

At least do a Google on Fairtrade and inform yourself before wasting your money on left-wing idealism.

It's an interesting article, but there's little presented to support its claims.

One of the claims, that fair trade items cost more is not entirely true either. Many are now similar prices, even cheaper than non-fairtrade products. There are even several sainsbury's basics items that are fairtrade. In some cases you could save money by switching to fair trade.

This price difference claim, as well as the lack of obvious research raises questions. Where are the figures showing that most the profit goes to the retailers? They can't make that claim without figures, and I think they should share them.

They have also failed to mention that the fairtrade agreement has set prices, and it would not be too hard to use these to determine just how much actually went to the producers.

I'm also unhappy with the rather scattered criticisms. We're taken all over the place, from the land used by organic farming to the carbon emissions from people driving to their local farmer's market. And while we're on that topic, is it really fair to hold it against farmer's markets that they don't have the extensive infrastructure of major supermarkets and that some of their consumers choose to drive to them?

Scattered criticisms are the sign of less objectivity and impartiality in a subject. Just one fundamental point made well is plenty, no need to overload us with every criticism that can be found.

As for the paragraph

[FONT=verdana,geneva,arial,sans serif][SIZE=-1]So what should the ethically minded consumer do?[/SIZE][/FONT]

The writer doesn't actually suggest a single thing we can do, instead they talk about vague things and suggest the government should do something.

Anyway, the article has some interesting counter criticisms, but they're not really substantiated in any way and the article itself is poorly constructed. As a piece of journalism I don't think it's compelling enough or strongly supported through facts to justify changing my mind.

hotbern

I didn't know this - what a great money saver!
I normally spend £2-£3 on my fairtrade tea bags, what a great saving, thanks!

max2002ad wrote: »

Sainsbury's Basic's (own brand) Tea bags are Fairtrade and only cost 28p for 80 tea bags. The best news is that the tea tastes great and much better than other own brand teas.

valiant

Ben84 wrote: »

It's an interesting article, but there's little presented to support its claims.

In the big bad world, some arguments are based on facts; some on reason; some on just emotions. Most are a combination. In this case the argument is primarily based on reason.....albeit pretty compelling reason. And it's not presenting a maverick view. The media is littered with similar views. Just Google.

The counter-argument; that Fairtrade is a good thing, seems to me to be equally devoid of fact. Emotions and the 'feel good' factor seem to be more compelling to those who're convinced.

Ben84 wrote: »

One of the claims, that fair trade items cost more is not entirely true either. Many are now similar prices, even cheaper than non-fairtrade products. There are even several sainsbury's basics items that are fairtrade. In some cases you could save money by switching to fair trade.

Just because a big retailer, such as Sainsburys, chooses to offer Fairtrade products at competitive prices doesn't mean that they're reflecting the true cost of those products in those prices. Sainsbury's know full well that encouraging the 'feel good' factor in one product encourages spending at their stores on other products. It makes commercial sense to subsidise some Fairtrade products if people are naive enough to believe that they're doing some good by buying them. The real question is whether Fairtrade products are generally cheaper or more expensive. The answer seems obvious.

Ben84 wrote: »

This price difference claim, as well as the lack of obvious research raises questions. Where are the figures showing that most the profit goes to the retailers? They can't make that claim without figures, and I think they should share them.

It's basic retail economics. Retailers react to market forces, not morality. They charge what the market can bear. And if they're confronted with affluent customers (especially naive, affluent customers such as most of those contributing to this thread), they know they can charge more. What better way to identify affluent customers than by focusing on products that affluent customers are more likely to buy e.g. Fairtrade products. Other than the point made above, there's little reason to be competitive on Fairtrade products.

Ben84 wrote: »

They have also failed to mention that the fairtrade agreement has set prices, and it would not be too hard to use these to determine just how much actually went to the producers.

Fair point. But I'm not sure that prices paid to producers are as transparent as you suggest.

Ben84 wrote: »

I'm also unhappy with the rather scattered criticisms. We're taken all over the place, from the land used by organic farming to the carbon emissions from people driving to their local farmer's market. And while we're on that topic, is it really fair to hold it against farmer's markets that they don't have the extensive infrastructure of major supermarkets and that some of their consumers choose to drive to them?

Scattered criticisms are the sign of less objectivity and impartiality in a subject. Just one fundamental point made well is plenty, no need to overload us with every criticism that can be found.

I'm concerned about Fairtrade specifically and that's what this thread is about. The other stuff covered in the article is for another discussion.

Ben84 wrote: »

As for the paragraphThe writer doesn't actually suggest a single thing we can do, instead they talk about vague things and suggest the government should do something.

I think you'll agree that just because there isn't an obvious alternative solution to a problem, that one must behave like a headless chicken and opt for a solution that's likely to make the matter worse. The writer does allude to the use of political methods. Personally, I'd suggest that people's money and efforts would be far better spent supporting organisations who advocate free trade and who argue against the imposition of import tariffs by the EU on products from developing countries.

Ben84 wrote: »

Anyway, the article has some interesting counter criticisms, but they're not really substantiated in any way and the article itself is poorly constructed. As a piece of journalism I don't think it's compelling enough or strongly supported through facts to justify changing my mind.

I quoted the article as just an example of the huge amount of criticism that's been leveled at the Fairtrade movement. That a particular journalist doesn't make his case is hardly a rational basis for dissing the whole argument. Google is your friend, not inarticulate journalists or Fairtrade idealists. Inform yourself.

In any case, despite your objections to the article, you haven't addressed the core point he makes:

".....But prices of agricultural commodities are low because of overproduction [ok...usually that's the reason]. By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other crops and so depresses prices—thus achieving, for most farmers [i.e. those not supported by the Fairtrade scheme], exactly the opposite of what the initiative is intended to do." My comments in brackets.

Lastly, a note to the moderator on here. These posts are on topic because I'm questioning the whole premise of the title of this thread. That MSE chooses to make those presumptions by starting a thread like this is pretty depressing. I think the least the alternative argument deserves (that Fairtrade actually damages the economies of developing countries and that Free-trade is a better solution) is a 'Fair-hearing'.