Interested in your attitudes towards British Farmers...
Oldmacdonald
Posts: 926
...and the Ag industry.
0
Comments
-
I won't pretend I know anything about farming but the country should at least make it possibly for them to survive0
-
Some of them are tossers, most of them are ok.
I would quite gladly ram my former neighbour's teeth down his throat, and he was a farmer. On the other hand all my other neighbours (most of them farmers) are decent chaps.0 -
Oldmacdonald wrote:...and the Ag industry.
I think it's important that we grow enough of our own food so that we are independent of any other country. It's a bit daft for us to be independent in energy, but not in food - only people who eat lightbulbs would be okay with that.
We need to pay our farmers properly for the job that they do for us.
On the other hand, the meat industry is on the way out. A good analogy is someone buying a car who's squeamish about cutting and welding metal. Many people who buy meat and meat products from supermarkets are in danger of losing their connection with where and how it is made. I can't see that being healthy, or sustainable in the long run.
Ta - Arabic for moo-cow0 -
My vote goes to;
Farmers - they haven't got a hope in hell since the supermarkets have got them by the boll0cks and it is amazing they even bother to try anymore.0 -
You think they haven't lost that connection already?
Yo ask 100 people where bacon comes from, I bet you'd be amazed.0 -
Let's not see everything through rose tinted spectacles. I've got a lot of sympathy for the problems farmers face with the supermarkets and the difficulty making a living from a low margin industry. However, let's not forget the billions spent on agricultural subsidies, imposing a cost on the rest of the economy while undermining the market for farmers in the developing world. Or the billions spent bailing the farming industry out for foot and mouth and mad cow disease; problems created by farming practices but which the rest of us carry the cost. And of course the environmental problems caused by overgrazing, nitrogen run-off in the water, flooding caused by land-drainage, loss of habitat etc.
There are plenty of other industries facing global competition, low margins and low pay, yet for seem reason farming is often regarded as a special case, worthy of ongoing support from the taxpayer that the other industries have been denied, even though they employed more people.0 -
You farmers, if you see a lovely field with a family having a picnic, and a nice pond in it, you fill in the pond with concrete, plough the family into the field, blow up the tree, and use the leaves to make a dress for your wife who is also your brother.0
-
mjones wrote:There are plenty of other industries facing global competition, low margins and low pay, yet for seem reason farming is often regarded as a special case, worthy of ongoing support from the taxpayer that the other industries have been denied, even though they employed more people.
Cough, MG ROVER, Cough.0 -
Oldmacdonald wrote:mjones wrote:There are plenty of other industries facing global competition, low margins and low pay, yet for seem reason farming is often regarded as a special case, worthy of ongoing support from the taxpayer that the other industries have been denied, even though they employed more people.
Cough, MG ROVER, Cough.
Your point being? MG Rover is no more, precisely because there were no more handouts from the taxpayer. I don't see any sign of the CAP disappearing for a while.
FWIW, I don't believe in massive handouts to any industry, and the dubious loans given to MG in its dying days were a good example of why they are usually a bad thing: taking money from the productive part of the economy to prop up a failing bit, but not actually saving it, merely putting off the difficult decisions for a while for short term electoral considerations.
I'm curious- do you think more money should be spent subsidising farming, and if so, where should it come from? And do you also believe in subsidies for the rest of industry? Sounds rather like old fashioned centrally planned socialism to me!
0 -
Certainly not. I believe subsidies should be stopped. Completely. And let the market dictate prices. But the fact of the matter is that this will not work.
The reason being that the farm gate prices will have to rise considerably before any farmer starts to make money, this is passed on to the consumer and of course at every stage each processor uses it as an excuse to hike up the price a bit more.
At the end of the day therefore, the price you pay for your groceries (if buying British) will be a lot higher than it is just now, and that will mean British produce will fail to be able to compete with imports.
Result: Farmers out of business, and the whole ag ancillary companies.0 -
A minimum farm gate price for food seems like a better bet. I wouldn't mind paying 5p more for a pint of milk ... if I knew it was going to the farmer.mjones wrote:Oldmacdonald wrote:mjones wrote:There are plenty of other industries facing global competition, low margins and low pay, yet for seem reason farming is often regarded as a special case, worthy of ongoing support from the taxpayer that the other industries have been denied, even though they employed more people.
Cough, MG ROVER, Cough.
Your point being? MG Rover is no more, precisely because there were no more handouts from the taxpayer. I don't see any sign of the CAP disappearing for a while.
FWIW, I don't believe in massive handouts to any industry, and the dubious loans given to MG in its dying days were a good example of why they are usually a bad thing: taking money from the productive part of the economy to prop up a failing bit, but not actually saving it, merely putting off the difficult decisions for a while for short term electoral considerations.
I'm curious- do you think more money should be spent subsidising farming, and if so, where should it come from? And do you also believe in subsidies for the rest of industry? Sounds rather like old fashioned centrally planned socialism to me!
While on the subject, we need to deal with the back door commercial side of farming. Increasing numbers of people buy 'free-range' eggs, but unknowingly buy pastries containing eggs from caged birds. It says 'free-range' on the egg box, and has a big picture of a farmhouse and pecking chickens, but it doesn't say anything on the pastry box.Ta - Arabic for moo-cow0 -
Subsidies to farmers are a tricky thing.
Importing food may well be cheaper, but there's something in me that objects to my food travelling that far... It seems stupid for bulk foods that could be grown here. Both stupid and rather wasteful, in a non-monetary sense. Money isn't everything after all!0 -
Are we just cutting off our noses though? Supermarkets screw the farmers to give you cheaper food, farmers get money from your taxes because the supermarkets have screwed them. So you think you are getting cheaper food but are really just paying the true cost of it by paying more tax.
Don't come back with any questions though as it is just a theory and I could do the maths even if I wanted to!0 -
Oldmacdonald wrote:Certainly not. I believe subsidies should be stopped. Completely. And let the market dictate prices. But the fact of the matter is that this will not work.
The reason being that the farm gate prices will have to rise considerably before any farmer starts to make money, this is passed on to the consumer and of course at every stage each processor uses it as an excuse to hike up the price a bit more.
At the end of the day therefore, the price you pay for your groceries (if buying British) will be a lot higher than it is just now, and that will mean British produce will fail to be able to compete with imports.
Result: Farmers out of business, and the whole ag ancillary companies.
Well, I'm sorry - that's just tough. When I buy potatoes I don't give a damn whether they come from Gloucestershire or Ghana. It is unrealistic for the government to subsidise them and all the 'ancillary' companies just so we can say we've got a farming industry and lots of little englanders can say "I only eat locally grown produce". If they want locally grown produce, maybe they should get an allotment and grow it themselves.
The government might aswell just pay people to sit on their arse all day than to prop up an uncompetitive industry.0 -
formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well, I'm sorry - that's just tough. When I buy potatoes I don't give a damn whether they come from Gloucestershire or Ghana. It is unrealistic for the government to subsidise them and all the 'ancillary' companies just so we can say we've got a farming industry and lots of little englanders can say "I only eat locally grown produce". If they want locally grown produce, maybe they should get an allotment and grow it themselves.
The government might aswell just pay people to sit on their arse all day than to prop up an uncompetitive industry.
How does wanting local produce make somebody a "little englander"? I buy it because generally it is fresher, tastier and has a lower carbon impact than food grown abroad.
But as to the general question of subsidy, why is it that farming, the nuclear industry and armaments are a special case? Half of the EU budget is spent on agriculture, and the cheap excess is then dumped on Africa so that their own farmers cannot compete.0 -
If that is your view then you better get used to a couple of things:
UHT milk
Meat coming from countries with the lowest animal welfare standards, where FMD and BSE is also currently a problem.
Out of curiosity - Do you think continental farmers should have their subsidies removed aswell?0 -
I am against subsidies of any sort. rather the government should impose taxes on import of food that we can produce ourselves. I don't mind paying a bit more for better quality food, that's why I would never buy meat from a supermarket, it is crap so I'd rather buy decent stuff from the butcher. How many of you would buy a bike from a supermarket over your LBD? Supermarkets don't know any more about meat than they do about bikes. They are interested only in your money, things like quality and even basic food hygiene don't come into it. So they screw farmers until they can't make a living and the vast majority of people support them in this by flocking to supermarkets like some 24hr church.0
-
The business with foot and mouth a few years ago and cheap meat brought from China, and the bird flu in Norfolk is a good enough reason why we should be self sufficient in food production.
The amount of fuel it takes to get food half way across the world is a very good reason why we should grow locally if the green argument is to be considered !
"I\'d clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"0 -
I selected the last one, only because it's you Oldmac! a dirtbag of the most delightful variety0
-
Farm subsidies in the EU and the US are one of the big reasons why developing countries, in particularly third world farmers, remain poor.
Most farmers in developing countries do grow surpluses but they cannot command prices as high as they'd like because they're having to compete with surplus produce grown in the EU and the US. The competitive advantage of many non-industrialised communities is in their agriculture, at least it would be an advantage if the it weren't for the subsidies.0 -
Well if it was that much fresher and tastier, then enough people would be willing to pay the higher prices necessary to sustain the industry without subsidy.ransos wrote:formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well, I'm sorry - that's just tough. When I buy potatoes I don't give a damn whether they come from Gloucestershire or Ghana. It is unrealistic for the government to subsidise them and all the 'ancillary' companies just so we can say we've got a farming industry and lots of little englanders can say "I only eat locally grown produce". If they want locally grown produce, maybe they should get an allotment and grow it themselves.
The government might aswell just pay people to sit on their arse all day than to prop up an uncompetitive industry.
How does wanting local produce make somebody a "little englander"? I buy it because generally it is fresher, tastier and has a lower carbon impact than food grown abroad.
""Organic"" food is why a lot of african farmers are squeezed out of business.ransos wrote:But as to the general question of subsidy, why is it that farming, the nuclear industry and armaments are a special case? Half of the EU budget is spent on agriculture, and the cheap excess is then dumped on Africa so that their own farmers cannot compete.
Most of them can't afford to buy the rights to the "organic" label, so they simply can't compete in a large portion of the market.0 -
bird flu and foot and mouth are two good reasons why we shouldn't trust food grown in Britain.linfordlunchbox wrote:The business with foot and mouth a few years ago and cheap meat brought from China, and the bird flu in Norfolk is a good enough reason why we should be self sufficient in food production.
The amount of fuel it takes to get food half way across the world is a very good reason why we should grow locally if the green argument is to be considered !0 -
formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well if it was that much fresher and tastier, then enough people would be willing to pay the higher prices necessary to sustain the industry without subsidy.ransos wrote:formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well, I'm sorry - that's just tough. When I buy potatoes I don't give a damn whether they come from Gloucestershire or Ghana. It is unrealistic for the government to subsidise them and all the 'ancillary' companies just so we can say we've got a farming industry and lots of little englanders can say "I only eat locally grown produce". If they want locally grown produce, maybe they should get an allotment and grow it themselves.
The government might aswell just pay people to sit on their arse all day than to prop up an uncompetitive industry.
How does wanting local produce make somebody a "little englander"? I buy it because generally it is fresher, tastier and has a lower carbon impact than food grown abroad.
""Organic"" food is why a lot of african farmers are squeezed out of business.ransos wrote:But as to the general question of subsidy, why is it that farming, the nuclear industry and armaments are a special case? Half of the EU budget is spent on agriculture, and the cheap excess is then dumped on Africa so that their own farmers cannot compete.
Most of them can't afford to buy the rights to the "organic" label, so they simply can't compete in a large portion of the market.
Who said anything about organic?0 -
ransos wrote:formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well if it was that much fresher and tastier, then enough people would be willing to pay the higher prices necessary to sustain the industry without subsidy.ransos wrote:formerlyknownasbonj wrote:
Well, I'm sorry - that's just tough. When I buy potatoes I don't give a damn whether they come from Gloucestershire or Ghana. It is unrealistic for the government to subsidise them and all the 'ancillary' companies just so we can say we've got a farming industry and lots of little englanders can say "I only eat locally grown produce". If they want locally grown produce, maybe they should get an allotment and grow it themselves.
The government might aswell just pay people to sit on their arse all day than to prop up an uncompetitive industry.
How does wanting local produce make somebody a "little englander"? I buy it because generally it is fresher, tastier and has a lower carbon impact than food grown abroad.
""Organic"" food is why a lot of african farmers are squeezed out of business.ransos wrote:But as to the general question of subsidy, why is it that farming, the nuclear industry and armaments are a special case? Half of the EU budget is spent on agriculture, and the cheap excess is then dumped on Africa so that their own farmers cannot compete.
Most of them can't afford to buy the rights to the "organic" label, so they simply can't compete in a large portion of the market.
Who said anything about organic?
Me.0 -
So Bonj, you think that we shouldn't buy bristish food because of foot & mouth and bird flu, even though they originated in the far east. And that organic is bad because some african farmers can't afford it, as if this is the reason for their problems?
I think I'll step out of this debate at this point, there's no point arguing with the absurd.0 -
Bonj - Show me a country that hasn't had FMD at some point.
SJ - How very dare you! 0 -
a dirtbag of the most delightful variety0
-
Never met a poor farmer, the subsidies they recieve are unbelievable, but still they moan on!! Too much rain, not enough rain, too much sun not enough sun; bunch of moaning bu99ers with too much money and not enough time to spend it. If farming is that bad -pack the job in like anyone would do, but no, better to complain than to throw away all that lovely money for sitting on tour jacksey doing nowt!!!
As you can tell i don`t have the time of day for the moaning gits :evil:
It`s a state of mind.0 -
ransos wrote:So Bonj, you think that we shouldn't buy bristish food because of foot & mouth and bird flu, even though they originated in the far east. And that organic is bad because some african farmers can't afford it, as if this is the reason for their problems?
I think I'll step out of this debate at this point, there's no point arguing with the absurd.
they originated in the far east but obviously like any disease got worse as they swept west, that's why bernard mathews had to kill about a million chickens in norfolk.
Plus china just spray 'em all with strong chemicals and have done with it. The british are far too bleedin' heart for that.0 -
Greenland?Oldmacdonald wrote:Bonj - Show me a country that hasn't had FMD at some point.0
