A July dipped in chocolate. Ate it, talked about it, thought
about it, ate it, read about it, worried about it, ate it,
wrote about it, and ate some more. Elsewhere in Dunedin,
people rolled it down a sealed road on a hill.
One morning this week I phoned
England to talk about it. England-based Dad, who knows of my
fondness for fair trade, had forwarded a 36-page report
called "The Great Hunger Lottery", just published by the
World Development Movement.
I cannot explain its content because my understanding of
complex things only lasts as long as I am reading about them,
but it involved chocolate because it involved the prices of
commodities, including cocoa.
Yes, so one morning, I phoned one of the British financial
regulators. To set a scene, but not necessarily this one: it
was shortly before 2am so I had a nice drowsy erudite drawl;
because it was cold, my condensed breath added literary
smoke-like wisps to the room; and because 2am is the golden
hour when you're least inhibited yet still able to speak
coherently, I sounded highly, yes highly articulate.
The World Development Movement had urged readers of its
report to phone the regulator. The regulator is called the
Financial Services Authority, and the woman on the line did
that thing where they repeat what you say.
"So, you want to see position limits on food derivatives,"
she said.
"I do," I said. It was a bit like a wedding. A shotgun
wedding to an opinion.
"And you want speculation in food to be regulated to stop
hunger?" said she.
Bit simplistic, lady, but however, "I do."
"Thank you. At this point I do have to let you know we
regulate financial services provided in the UK, but that's
all we do. We don't make any decisions about the sorts of
issues you are raising."
"Oh well, yes, but I hope you will regulate Goldman Sachs," I
said, running short on well-informed, prepared utterances.
"That sort of thing is all decided by the Parliament," she
said.
"I get that, but hopefully when you're all sitting round with
your managers and they go, ‘What have people been calling
about this month?' you'll go, 'They want to see food
speculation regulated,' and so it will get back to the
ministry that way."
"Uh-huh. And is there anything else I can help you with
today?"
There was not.
I also tried to make sense of chocolate economics one night
at work, after the next day's paper had been safely tucked
into the press.
One of the three Peters mentioned he had found an American
brand to be particularly junky.
"It's amazing they're even allowed to call it chocolate," he
said. "It's mostly sugar and, bah, God knows what."
I took this as a chance to ask wiser people than myself how
market capitalism worked.
If profits had to increase every year, was it just inevitable
that the major chocolate companies would forever be degrading
their product by increments, adding cheap fillers (palm oil,
sugar) to save money?
"They can also reduce the size of the bars," one of the
subeditors said. "The only other option is to invade a new
planet to sell the product there, because all markets on this
one are already full of chocolate."
All markets? I wondered vaguely about the recent easing of
the trade embargo in the Middle East to allow chocolate into
Palestine, but that thought was interrupted by George Orwell.
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the quality of chocolate has
declined to the point where it "normally was dull-brown
crumbly stuff that tasted, as nearly as one could describe
it, like the smoke of a rubbish fire".
I wondered aloud whether the free market was just a form of
totalitarianism. This was met by shrugs.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.