""David G. Bell"" wrote in message
.. .
On Wednesday, in article

"Michael Saunby" wrote:

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On 8 Jan 2003 01:41:17 -0800, (Gordon Couger)
wrote:

You can't compare running a business to working for wages.

I think you mean, they -can- be compared, but will then be found to
be different on a number of aspects. But both activities are to make
income to cover the living expenses and investments of people, and
you
can very well compare the income generated by running a business to
the income generated by working for a wage.

The UK farm economy statisticians do calculate several measures of
farm income, e.g. Net Farm Income and Cash Income. The statisticians
say: for comparisons with the income of employees in other sectors of
society, do not use the Net Farm Income figures, use the Cash Income
figures.

Avg. annual Cash Income per farm in UK was about £55000 in 1995,
decreased to about £30000 during the most recent years up to 2002.

For comparison, the avg income earner in UK has had a total income
of between £20000 and £15000 per year during the same period.


You're still quoting for individuals, not household incomes. Many,
perhaps
most, farms have 2 or more family members working for the farm
business.

That's only one of the distortions. Torsten has been rather vague about
the relation between average cash income and the other measures of farm
business size. I suspect that the known differences between large and
small farms, where the large farms spend less per acre for the same
income, don't just affect "Net Farm Income".

Isn't it also the case that something like 80% of subsidy is paid to 20% of
farm businesses. So the "average" farm actually receives a lot less than
the average subsidy. However the subsidy largely reflects production which
suggests that 20% of our farms - most likely the really big ones - produce
most and even without subsidy will thrive. Those farms that are genuinely
being kept afloat by subsidy probably only get a very small proportion.
This is always the case though, even with listed companies the best
performing are often an order of magnitude more productive than the
average, yet they all receive tax relief and various incentives to create
jobs, etc.


Elsethread, Jim-and-Brenda also mention paid holidays. How does one
calculate an allowance for that? It's not just the difference between
GBP 300 per week for 50 weeks and GBP 288 for 52 weeks, there is an
opportunity cost for not having those two weeks. And then there are the
longer working hours per week, and the need to check livestock daily.

When times were good and farmers did take holidays they employed people to
do the work while they were away. Many business don't need to do this.
Then again those businesses that do really provide 24hr a day cover 7 days
a week such as fire services, employ 4 or 5 people for every post!


The actual figures get fuzzy, because a farmer might find the time to do
some DIY, but if Torsten wants a price for everything, he should set a
price on what the farmer has to forgo. How much does a painter and
decorator cost per hour?


Depends how long you're prepared to wait for the job to be started and when
it might eventually be completed.

Michael Saunby