On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:52:41 -0600, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message

Which WTO ruling are you thinking of?

The one on US beef.

There is a ruling that the beef hormone ban must be based on a risk
assessment, if that is what you are thunking of -- but the ban is
rather obviously based on a risk assessment. Indeed, on the thread
*EU confirms growth hormones pose health risk to consumers*
we discussed the most recent EU risk assessment in support of the ban,
on sci.agriculture only six months ago.

Michael Percy wrote in message
news
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

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?

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.

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

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:44:39 -0000, David P
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:14:20 -0000, David P
wrote:
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.

Try with a proper question.


It *was* a proper question. The fact that you chose not to respond to it
as such says much to me.
--
David
Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies.
FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more!

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!

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

"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'

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.

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.

Michael Percy wrote in message
news
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

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!

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.

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!

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.