|
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
Gordon Couger wrote in message ... "Jim Webster" wrote in message ... Gordon Couger wrote in message ... If they don't feel they need farmers why are they subsiding them? here you confuse the EU and UK. Whenever there is a voluntary scheme, the UK does not pay out on it, if the EU allow an extra top up if a national government deems it necessary, the UK government doesn't deem it necessary. Love them or loathe them, If it wasn't for the EU there probably would not be organised agriculture in the UK any more, a handful of really big cereal operations and a lot of part time "ranching" of cattle and sheep at no input stocking rates. I am confusing the two. So the UK doesn't contribute any to the farmer? the thing about the Common Agricultural Policy is that it is common and the EU lays down regulations to ensure that it is stuck to. An example is the "green currency". Basically pre euro, and for those countries not in the euro zone, farm subsidies were/are paid in ecu/euro. As your currency strengthens against the euro the amount of subsidy you farmers get falls, as your currency weakens against the euro the amount farmers get increases. To stop countries running a weak currency and siphoning money off europe into their agriculture the EU set up a system to ensure that at regular intervals, or if currencies fluctuated outside certain limits, the "green" currency was revalued meaning farmers got the same Euros as they would have if their currency had remained static against the Euro. Hence when the Pound crashed out of the ERM on black wednesday we did OK, because we got more euros. Just briefly until the falling £ hit another band and the green £ was revalued. When the £ goes up and is strong against the Euro then the member state can pay money to make up the difference so their farmers don't miss out. The rules for weak currencies are statutory, countries have no choice. The EU knows its member states and tries to put in rules to stop them unfairly favouring their own nationals. The rules for strong currencies aren't compulsory because the EU couldn't believe that a member state would knowingly crucify it's own industries. Needless to say the UK government has paid only a proportion of the money necessary to compensate for the strong currency, and calculations show (you can get the figures of the statistics sections of the defra website) that over a billion £ sterling are being sucked out of UK agriculture every year. It is probable that already not paying this money to UK agriculture has already covered the costs of BSE. Half the beef in the US is rasied by the guy with a job in town and few head at home. It is a real concern how to get him the better genetics that he needs to move in the right direction. we have smallholders and I don't think that there is any government outreach to them. They can get drawn into the net of paperwork and form filling but will probably not get much in the way of support payments. No till has the potential to put farming in the same boat. I look at that and think I could buy a old tractor and a planter and farm a couple of quarters of cotton with a good scout and spray plane and make money at it particularly if I put in a center pivot and drilled enough wells to get water for it. Now that we have the boll weevil under control and BT cotton lets us spray for insects with out having to continue to spray once a week to keep the boll worm out if we kill the beneficial insects. It makes cotton a new deal. I could probably even hire the planting done. But that gets a bit dicey. You gamble on someone being free when you need them and that is far from a sure thing. I made a lot of nice money running tractors round the clock so I could have some extra time to hire out to others at critical times. round here we have a lot of contractors, more small farmers, farmers sons or similar who have a tractor, slurry tanker, round baler and wrapper, etc. Some will do mowing, ploughing etc. There are outfits who can put a couple of silage teams into the field (self propelled harvester, three tractors and trailers, a rake, two mowers and a loading shovel for the pit) but these are the minority. -- Jim Webster "The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind" 'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami' |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
Michael Percy wrote in message et... On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 22:07:26 +0000, David P wrote: As things are getting a bit boring in here, perhaps we could extend this discussion to include land tenure? I happen to know that Torsten has strongly held, if slightly wacky, views on the subject. I believe I had noticed that. Pity he dropped out; I had planned on asking him what a tenant farmer should have done once I was clear on what his views on an owner-occupier was. .. as if you did not look silly enough already .. lol and your advice to the tenant farmer would have been what? -- Jim Webster "The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind" 'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami' Mike |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
|
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
In article , Torsten Brinch
writes As things are getting a bit boring in here, perhaps we could extend this discussion to include land tenure? No, first things first, Tim. First we must out what it is David P has misunderstood. Ever the agile argufier:-) regards -- Tim Lamb |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
In article ,
says... On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:51:22 +0000, Tim Lamb wrote: In article , David P writes you were impling that the people who were still farming were short-sighted. I was not. snipped the rest, all written under that misconception Shame. I thought you might take the time to explain yourself. As things are getting a bit boring in here, perhaps we could extend this discussion to include land tenure? No, first things first, Tim. First we must out what it is David P has misunderstood. I reckon the misunderstanding is down to you. Were I to have had the same conversation with others in UKBA I would have had a continuing dialogue. You seem to take a delight in setting a hare running and then, when you cannot recatch it, change direction completely. That is not my way; you will have to play with someone else. -- David Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies. FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more! |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
In article ,
Gordon Couger wrote: snip Your governments are looking for was to produce less crops while paying farmers more subsidy and importing more food. Most 3 graders can find the flaw in that. If you are gong to pay the farmer get something you can use out of him. You don't seem to care what WTO things anyway Take those idle acres and put them to something you need. It doesn't make any difference what it cost you are going to pat the farmer one way or another. I think the UK govt is trying to avoid doing that. Maybe you should close him down It's managing to do that. and put is stuff on display Yes. That's happening in many places. So long as it's not very modern ie should be nostalgic. and pay him a curator The number of farmers taking up the scheme will show whether they are offering an acceptable amount. So far, AIUI, it's just equivalent to "income forgone" - no explicit salary. What's "income forgone" in a farm making a loss? and by all you food from the low bidder. One of our Govt Ministers, Lord Whitty, is already advocating that. Cheers Jane Gordon -- Jane G : : S Devon |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
"David G. Bell" wrote in message .. . On Saturday, in article "Jim Webster" wrote: "David G. Bell" wrote in message .. . On Saturday, in article Well, I just have to grease the left ankle torsion actuator bushes on this Gundam, stuff the blonde wig in the tumble drier, and check the cockpit fan.... the only military system ever designed so that the pilot in his cockpit could smile at his girl in the control tower as he took off. grump YOU always get the girl in the control tower... /grump Though maybe Bubblegun Crisis would be more appropriate to farming.... Remember John Goomer and the beefburger? I must admit that the whole BSE thing is starting to look as if it does have all the makings of a classic bubblegum crisis. -- Jim Webster "The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind" 'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami' |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:02:38 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote: In article , Torsten Brinch writes As things are getting a bit boring in here, perhaps we could extend this discussion to include land tenure? No, first things first, Tim. First we must out what it is David P has misunderstood. Ever the agile argufier:-) I'm just a sailor of the floe. |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:30:30 -0000, David P
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:51:22 +0000, Tim Lamb wrote: In article , David P writes you were impling that the people who were still farming were short-sighted. I was not. snipped the rest, all written under that misconception I reckon the misunderstanding is down to you. Were I to have had the same conversation with others in UKBA I would have had a continuing dialogue. You seem to take a delight in setting a hare running and then, when you cannot recatch it, change direction completely. That is not my way; you will have to play with someone else. You still haven't identified what it was I said, which you took as implying, that people who are still farming are shortsighted. |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
Michael Percy wrote in message et... On Sun, 08 Dec 2002 07:12:41 +0000, Jim Webster wrote: I believe I had noticed that. Pity he dropped out; I had planned on asking him what a tenant farmer should have done once I was clear on what his views on an owner-occupier was. .. as if you did not look silly enough already .. lol and your advice to the tenant farmer would have been what? Jim, I do not think dealing with hypothetical questions is the right thing now. .. as if you did not look silly enough already .. lol? -- Jim Webster "The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind" 'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami' Mike |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
In article ,
says... On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:30:30 -0000, David P wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:51:22 +0000, Tim Lamb wrote: In article , David P writes you were impling that the people who were still farming were short-sighted. I was not. snipped the rest, all written under that misconception I reckon the misunderstanding is down to you. Were I to have had the same conversation with others in UKBA I would have had a continuing dialogue. You seem to take a delight in setting a hare running and then, when you cannot recatch it, change direction completely. That is not my way; you will have to play with someone else. You still haven't identified what it was I said, which you took as implying, that people who are still farming are shortsighted. From: Torsten Brinch Newsgroups: uk.business.agriculture,sci.agriculture Subject: UK farm profitability to jun 2002 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:55:45 +0100 ......But that isn't the point. UK had in 1996 a farm income peak, the highest in 20 years. The Times could see what would come after, so why couldn't the farmers. "The Times could see what could come after so why couldn't the farmers' Does this not imply shortsightedness? If you agree then answer my question. If you do not there is no point in continuing. And if you want me to repeat the question, tough. Go back up the thread - you are the one who sought to confuse. -- David Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies. FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more! |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:20:08 -0000, David P
wrote: In article , says... You still haven't identified what it was I said, which you took as implying, that people who are still farming are shortsighted. From: Torsten Brinch Newsgroups: uk.business.agriculture,sci.agriculture Subject: UK farm profitability to jun 2002 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:55:45 +0100 .....But that isn't the point. UK had in 1996 a farm income peak, the highest in 20 years. The Times could see what would come after, so why couldn't the farmers. "The Times could see what could come after so why couldn't the farmers' Does this not imply shortsightedness? No, it's an expression of my disbelief, that the farmers could not see the same as The Times could see. |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
In article ,
says... On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:20:08 -0000, David P wrote: In article , says... You still haven't identified what it was I said, which you took as implying, that people who are still farming are shortsighted. From: Torsten Brinch Newsgroups: uk.business.agriculture,sci.agriculture Subject: UK farm profitability to jun 2002 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:55:45 +0100 .....But that isn't the point. UK had in 1996 a farm income peak, the highest in 20 years. The Times could see what would come after, so why couldn't the farmers. "The Times could see what could come after so why couldn't the farmers' Does this not imply shortsightedness? No, it's an expression of my disbelief, that the farmers could not see the same as The Times could see. Goodbye. -- David Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies. FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more! |
UK farm profitability to jun 2002
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:17:08 -0000, David P
wrote: In article , says... On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:20:08 -0000, David P wrote: In article , says... You still haven't identified what it was I said, which you took as implying, that people who are still farming are shortsighted. From: Torsten Brinch Newsgroups: uk.business.agriculture,sci.agriculture Subject: UK farm profitability to jun 2002 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:55:45 +0100 .....But that isn't the point. UK had in 1996 a farm income peak, the highest in 20 years. The Times could see what would come after, so why couldn't the farmers. "The Times could see what could come after so why couldn't the farmers' Does this not imply shortsightedness? No, it's an expression of my disbelief, that the farmers could not see the same as The Times could see. Goodbye. If I may make an observation, before you must leave, I think what we have experienced is a clash of cultures. My culture is one of fixing problems, your culture seems to be one in which fixing blame is imperative. Perhaps if we both keep that difference in mind we will leave less room for future misunderstanding. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter