<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>btilly</author><text>It is worth noting that here, as is typical in politics, a focused interest (sugar growers) beats a diffuse interest (the general public).  We would all benefit from ending this ridiculous practice.  But we would individually benefit very little, and it isn&apos;t worth much from us to do so.&lt;p&gt;But it gets worse.  Because there is a second layer of beneficiaries here.  Corn growers.  And they have great political power, as is seen in the subsidies they get and the ethanol additives that are legally require (which damage engines, and are a net negative on energy once you consider the costs of growing that corn).&lt;p&gt;Not the least among the advantages that corn growers have politically is the simple fact that they are important in Iowa.  Which means that any national politician who dreams of being President, or of working with any other that has that dream, has very direct incentives to keep corn growers happy.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why high fructose corn syrup replaced sugar in US</title><url>http://shkrobius.livejournal.com/411007.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>rayiner</author><text>The page linked in the article is worth a couple of chuckles: &quot;The US sugar industry is almost as important to our economic vitality as is a steady supply of affordable energy. Subjecting sugar to the unpredictable forces of global laissez faire capitalism would likely lead to &apos;dumping&apos; by countries whose own sugar industries are much more protected than is ours.&quot;&lt;p&gt;In a sense, this quote isn&apos;t wrong. That&apos;s exactly what the sugar producing countries would do. The U.S. almost certainly does not have a competitive advantage in sugar production, and if the industry were deregulated domestic sugar production would end, and we&apos;d become sugar importers. And that would be okay, because sugar isn&apos;t the strategically important commodity it once was.&lt;p&gt;But the same reasoning applies to steel and arms manufacturing too. The difference is, it wouldn&apos;t be okay if all our domestic steel production went overseas.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why high fructose corn syrup replaced sugar in US</title><url>http://shkrobius.livejournal.com/411007.html</url></story>