"Hamish Macbeth" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

Sad though it is, that's actually quite good for the UK. The vast
majority
of UK workers contribute very little to GDP, e.g. those working in
tourism,
teachers, nurses, etc.



Gross Domestic Product. The total market value of all final goods and
services produced in a country in a given year


So all of the above in the private sector contribute.


And the ever growing public sector and lower efficiency - ratio of teachers
and nurses to general population mean the value of the contribution per
nurse or teacher just keeps falling.

Michael Saunby

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:23:47 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In article , David P
writes

can. Just looking at 93-01 inflation would give a '01 value of c 4700
as cf the annual average of 7357. At least your land values have
exceeded inflationary growth on RPI. But not when compared to
residential value increases. I don't have those stats to hand so
can't put them in for interest - sorry.

Pity you mentioned that! Now Torsten will be convinced we are all money
grubbing capitalist *******s.....

I can't see how that can be concluded from the figures, Tim. In any
case, David has not revealed anything that I did not, in the substance
know already.

I should have made it clear, since this is crossposted to ukba, that I
did not mean to blame any land owner for capitalizing the land value
increases unleashed in the wake of the McSharry reform, in accordance
with the law.

The land value increases are relevant to this thread only to the
extent they have affected farm profitability, e.g. to which extent
land value increases may have increased the cost of renting land in
the farmers accounts, and thereby contributed to the low UK farm
profitability up to 2002.

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:38:42 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Hamish Macbeth" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

Sad though it is, that's actually quite good for the UK. The vast
majority
of UK workers contribute very little to GDP, e.g. those working in
tourism,
teachers, nurses, etc.



Gross Domestic Product. The total market value of all final goods and
services produced in a country in a given year


So all of the above in the private sector contribute.


And the ever growing public sector and lower efficiency - ratio of teachers
and nurses to general population mean the value of the contribution per
nurse or teacher just keeps falling.

The contribution of health care to the UK GDP has been increasing
steadily over the years, to reach 6 per cent in 1990. It increased
steeply to about 7 per cent coincident with the EU internal market,
but has since then leveled off at about 6.5-6.7 per cent of the
total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:38:42 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Hamish Macbeth" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

Sad though it is, that's actually quite good for the UK. The vast
majority
of UK workers contribute very little to GDP, e.g. those working in
tourism,
teachers, nurses, etc.



Gross Domestic Product. The total market value of all final goods and
services produced in a country in a given year


So all of the above in the private sector contribute.


And the ever growing public sector and lower efficiency - ratio of
teachers
and nurses to general population mean the value of the contribution per
nurse or teacher just keeps falling.

The contribution of health care to the UK GDP has been increasing
steadily over the years, to reach 6 per cent in 1990. It increased
steeply to about 7 per cent coincident with the EU internal market,
but has since then leveled off at about 6.5-6.7 per cent of the
total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

Quite likely true. Sad, but true. Unfortunately we have only one major
purchaser (and supplier) of health and education services in the UK and the
value this purchaser (also supplier) puts on these services is unlikely to
be anything like the value these services would have in a free market.

Michael Saunby

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:17:08 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .

..The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

Quite likely true. Sad, but true.

OK, and, as I said, UK employs 2 % of its workforce producing just
0.8 per cent of the GDP in agricultural products. Subsidy money would
seem better spent getting rid of a bunch of old farmers who have
gotten used to be fed by society, than to continue supporting this
kind of imbalance.

Torsten Brinch wrote in message
...


The contribution of health care to the UK GDP has been increasing
steadily over the years, to reach 6 per cent in 1990. It increased
steeply to about 7 per cent coincident with the EU internal market,
but has since then leveled off at about 6.5-6.7 per cent of the
total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

depends entirely how it is calculated.
If we had no agriculture at all, then obviously we would have to import
more. This might even increase our GDP because it would create more work
for hauliers, shippers etc.
GDP is not a good figure to do too much with.
--
Jim Webster

"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"

'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'

In article ,
says...

total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

I would not dream of doubting you - but can you substantiate that please?
Is it a very current 'current' - the figures I have seen are about a year
old and said it was around 2% of GDP. Interestingly enough the %of
population employed in various categories tied in very closely to their
contribution to the GDP
--
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 Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:23:47 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In article , David P
writes

can. Just looking at 93-01 inflation would give a '01 value of c 4700
as cf the annual average of 7357.

Pity you mentioned that! Now Torsten will be convinced we are all money
grubbing capitalist *******s.....


The land value increases are relevant to this thread only to the
extent they have affected farm profitability, e.g. to which extent
land value increases may have increased the cost of renting land in
the farmers accounts, and thereby contributed to the low UK farm
profitability up to 2002.


I don't have rental figures to hand but I doubt they [Ag Holdings
Act]have kept pace with the rise in capital values - certaily many tennat
farmers have been succesfully arguing nil increases and decreases on 3
yrly reviews.
--
David
Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies.
FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more!

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:11:20 -0000, David P
wrote:

In article ,
says...

total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

I would not dream of doubting you - but can you substantiate that please?
Is it a very current 'current' -

NFU current fact sheet should suffice:
"Farming contributes £6.65 billion to the national economy or 0.8% of
the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), employing 557,000 farmers and farm
workers, or 2.0% of the UK workforce."
http://www.nfu.org.uk/info/report.asp

the figures I have seen are about a year old and said it was
around 2% of GDP.

Mr van Winkle, I presume :-) Agriculture's contribution to the UK GDP
has been decreasing for quite a while, it dropped below the 2 % point
nearly 20 years ago.

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:17:08 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .

..The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

Quite likely true. Sad, but true.

OK, and, as I said, UK employs 2 % of its workforce producing just
0.8 per cent of the GDP in agricultural products. Subsidy money would
seem better spent getting rid of a bunch of old farmers who have
gotten used to be fed by society, than to continue supporting this
kind of imbalance.


Surely all that would do is push up the average farm size, it's not as if
farms cease to exist when the farmer is given early retirement - he'll just
let it to a younger farmer.

Even if such a scheme reduced production the 2% producing 0.8% of GDP are
producing more that 50% of our food. If they stopped then we'd need to
import a great deal more - might that not risk taking food that ought to be
feeding people in Africa, or is it intended that we compete with American
to help them diet?

Michael Saunby

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:11:20 -0000, David P
wrote:

In article ,
says...

total GDP. The contribution of education to the UK GDP is slightly
less, about 5 per cent in 2001. The contribution of farm production to
the GDP is currently about 0.8 per cent.

I would not dream of doubting you - but can you substantiate that
please?
Is it a very current 'current' -

NFU current fact sheet should suffice:
"Farming contributes £6.65 billion to the national economy or 0.8% of
the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), employing 557,000 farmers and farm
workers, or 2.0% of the UK workforce."
http://www.nfu.org.uk/info/report.asp

the figures I have seen are about a year old and said it was
around 2% of GDP.

Mr van Winkle, I presume :-) Agriculture's contribution to the UK GDP
has been decreasing for quite a while, it dropped below the 2 % point
nearly 20 years ago.


Probably in step with the rise in the food processing industries. I expect
far more potatoes in the UK are sold in the form of ready to cook chips
than in sacks from farms. The contribution to GDP of those in the food
processing industries would be harmed very much if UK farming were to be
significantly reduced, since it wouldn't really make much sense to make
cheese, cakes, pies, etc. in a country with none of the raw materials and
very expensive (and often unionised) labour.

Michael Saunby

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:04:16 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .

.. UK employs 2 % of its workforce producing just
0.8 per cent of the GDP in agricultural products. Subsidy money would
seem better spent getting rid of a bunch of old farmers who have
gotten used to be fed by society, than to continue supporting this
kind of imbalance.


Surely all that would do is push up the average farm size,

What evidence do you have for that?

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:08:46 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
.. Agriculture's contribution to the UK GDP
has been decreasing for quite a while, it dropped below the 2 % point
nearly 20 years ago.


Probably in step with the rise in the food processing industries.

The ratio between agricultures contribution to GDP and household food
expenditure in the UK has been closely constant (approx. 1:9) for more
than 30 years.

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:04:16 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .

.. UK employs 2 % of its workforce producing just
0.8 per cent of the GDP in agricultural products. Subsidy money would
seem better spent getting rid of a bunch of old farmers who have
gotten used to be fed by society, than to continue supporting this
kind of imbalance.


Surely all that would do is push up the average farm size,

What evidence do you have for that?

It happens. The number of farmers in the UK has been falling for over a
century, the total area of farmed land has hardly changed, the average size
of holdings has increased.

The UK does not permit farm land to be used for any other purpose without
planning consent - not easy to get and other uses are not well liked by
non-farmers, e.g. land fill, golf courses, housing, etc. Farm land is too
valuable for a farmer to simply allow it to revert to scrub without payment
from government - payments are available in some areas to plant woods.

Unless you are proposing to pay farmers to trash their land then if they
are encouraged to leave farming they will sell or let their land to another
farmer. This already happens. How could it not happen?

Michael Saunby

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:08:46 -0000, "Michael Saunby"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
.. Agriculture's contribution to the UK GDP
has been decreasing for quite a while, it dropped below the 2 % point
nearly 20 years ago.


Probably in step with the rise in the food processing industries.

The ratio between agricultures contribution to GDP and household food
expenditure in the UK has been closely constant (approx. 1:9) for more
than 30 years.


So? Does this mean that GDP from food processing is negligible and like
agriculture should be handed over to other countries to waste their money
on so the UK can concentrate on the really useful things it does such as
state health care and education? (aka "taking in each others washing").

Michael Saunby