500m gov scheme to buy fat livestock

[neilo]

But what i do see is a import duty rising on lambs coming into the UK, this will surly make our lambs worth more money, or maybe i am just an optimist.

I seem to remember HMG saying, back in March, that NZ lamb would still be coming in tariff free, not that much comes here anyway.

 

[JP1]

I knew what GUTH meant but its very typical who picked up on it and even more typical who liked said persons posts

this is a farming forum not a forum for perfect English if that's what you want I am sure there are forums for that

@JP1 Have you seen the number of English mistakes that even I can see in @Clive 's posts ? funny how I have never seen you pick up on them

I'm commenting on the complete lack of clarity of the statement.

You're right that folks would be busy if correcting to a JRM level of grammar but that wasn't why I made the original point.

I made the original point for two reasons; 1. Was it meant to read as written. 2. If I tried to decipher what what written, GUTH seemed to be at 180 degree odds with how every other Leave proponent has lobbied i.e. it really was a simple binary vote question with no wider implications or side issues to be considered.

You two would win prizes for deflection.

 

[Henarar]

If you knew, can you write an explanation?

try actually reading it and thinking how it could be read differently if that's not to much to bloody well ask

 

[JP1]

Agricultural matters into Political matters
@Clive ?
All interlinked I know.
All say 40% dearer as taxes to export BUT what import Taxes are food Meat etc COMING into The UK after Brexit?

Agreed and moved

 

[JP1]

try actually reading it and thinking how it could be read differently if that's not to much to bloody well ask

I have . Many times. It doesn't make sense !!!

You came on in defence of GUTH , so I ask you to write an explanation as you said you knew what he meant

 

[Henarar]

I'm commenting on the complete lack of clarity of the statement.

You're right that folks would be busy if correcting to a JRM level of grammar but that wasn't why I made the original point.

I made the original point for two reasons; 1. Was it meant to read as written. 2. If I tried to decipher what what written, GUTH seemed to be at 180 degree odds with how every other Leave proponent has lobbied i.e. it really was a simple binary vote question with no wider implications or side issues to be considered.

You two would win prizes for deflection.

no we both come a way distant last with you in first place

 

[Henarar]

I have . Many times. It doesn't make sense !!!

You came on in defence of GUTH , so I ask you to write an explanation as you said you knew what he meant

if you knew it didn't makes sense read it again I am sure you can work out what he was trying to say that is if you want to

 

[JP1]

no we both come a way distant last with you in first place

I'll leave it there with you not wishing to explain what you say you understood.

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know." Donald Rumsfeld

 

[Henarar]

It is @gone up the hill 's post I will leave it for him to write it slightly differently to explain what he meant for all those that lack any common sense if he wants to
hope your proud of yourselves, FFS

 

[brigadoon]

Yes it bloody well is right!.. I know the director of a factory employs over 70 workers and exports over 80% of its output to the EU and imports the majority of its raw materials too. The director tried hard to explain that in the event of a leave vote there was a real danger of the UK leaving the EU without a free trade agreement. Without a free trade agreement the company would have no option but to close the UK plant and relocate all production to an EU facility. Despite this warning a large proportion of the staff still voted leave and said that they don't believe an end to free trade will ever be allowed to happen and "we just need to stop bloody immigration".

So you see many leave voters chose to dis-believe what has since proved to be very factual advice given by the government at the time of the referendum! Instead they chose to believe in the much more attractive, yet entirely fictitious picture that was sold by the pro-Brexit campaign.... it will all be easy, easy, easy...

Well now - it would seem that the people you refer to made a very conscious decision to vote leave come what may, and in doing so to ignore what you regard as good advice

And yet you seem to think they will be afraid of leaving without a deal.

I think the quote you are looking for is "The people have spoken, the b******ds"

Oh .. what happened to the emergency budget we would need the day after a vote to leave..........?

 

[brigadoon]

Did you really write that?

Yes he did - and you have lifted a single sentence out of context - here is the bit which you skipped over:-

As for how people voted, leavers saw the bigger picture and voted out for many reasons and quote rightly did not vote on a single issue like for example : How exports would be affected if its a no deal!

 

[farmerm]

But what i do see is a import duty rising on lambs coming into the UK, this will surly make our lambs worth more money, or maybe i am just an optimist.

In what parallel reality do you see import duty on lambs rising? The words coming from the cabinet members show that introducing no import duty on all agricultural products is much much more likely! A reduction on imports of lamb legs and chops will also do nothing to offset the fall in value on offal and other cuts that have no domestic demand.

 

[JP1]

Yes he did - and you have lifted a single sentence out of context - here is the bit which you skipped over:-

Originally I highlighted the paragraph and quoted the whole of GUTH's post. The condensed quoted text in my reply then did not show the bold bit just the start, so I went back in and removed some of the original post so the bold bit was in my post.

The paragraph on it's own still does not make sense

 

[farmerm]

Agricultural matters into Political matters
@Clive ?
All interlinked I know.
All say 40% dearer as taxes to export BUT what import Taxes are food Meat etc COMING into The UK after Brexit?

Import tax on agricultural produce are likely to be scrapped. The health of UK agriculture has far less impact on voters than food prices.

 

[gone up the hill]

I have . Many times. It doesn't make sense !!!

You came on in defence of GUTH , so I ask you to write an explanation as you said you knew what he meant

My post makes perfect sense thou of course with choice editing of my post when you quoted it you wrongly tried to make out it does not make any sense!

As for the Grammar, well as i have explained because of your TFF updates i can only use a very small ipad to post currently.

Such a shame that every brexit debate gets turned into a mud slinging match by remainers like jp1 who if they see any posts on this subject that they dont like they then start belittling/ putting down other posters!

Even more sad when its a moderator that drives this policy thou its clear why he is doing this as he is a remainer and wants to shut down any debate/ posts that supports brexit!


Forums are about having debates from both sides of a argument and not a one sided pro remain argument only that some on TFF push for on every brexit thread!

 

[DrWazzock]

I remember sitting in my office in 1990 something watching interest rates go up 2% per hour as we tried and failed to stay in the ERM which was supposed to the the qualifier for joining the EURO. John Major went on telly to say we would be doomed if we left the ERM and we would leave it over his dead body.

Next day we were out and life went on much better than expected.

Since that time I haven't taken much notice of doom mongering "experts" who take a high moral tone.

 

[brigadoon]

Originally I highlighted the paragraph and quoted the whole of GUTH's post. The condensed quoted text in my reply then did not show the bold bit just the start, so I went back in and removed some of the original post so the bold bit was in my post.

The paragraph on it's own still does not make sense

Then on that we differ - I see it as being clear and frankly from anyone but a moderator would have suspected the quote as trolling, and - given the reaction - succesfull trolling at that.

But we are now a long way away from discussion of th £500M support so enough on brexit voter's rationale - I think you have moved the thread anyway

 

[JP1]

My post makes perfect sense thou of course with choice editing of my post when you quoted it you wrongly tried to make out it does not make any sense!

As for the Grammar, well as i have explained because of your TFF updates i can only use a very small ipad to post currently.

Such a shame that every brexit debate gets turned into a mud slinging match by remainers like jp1 who if they see any posts on this subject that they dont like they then start belittling/ putting down other posters!

Even more sad when its a moderator that drives this policy thou its clear why he is doing this as he is a remainer and wants to shut down any debate/ posts that supports brexit!


Forums are about having debates from both sides of a argument and not a one sided pro remain argument only that some on TFF push for on every brexit thread!

Now then GUTH. I rather fancy your original post that was rather incendiary

Here is the full text as directed at @farmerm :

"Utter rubbish and yet more remaoiner bullpoo!

The EU offered the UK a trade deal based on Canada + last year but remainer May and her remainer team turned it down as she stated it would mean the UK would not be aligned close enough to the EU as she wanted if we accepted it!


As for how people voted, leavers saw the bigger picture and voted out for many reasons and quote rightly did not vote on a single issue like for example : How exports would be affected if its a no deal!

Anyone who is so narrow minded and base their vote on a single issue in such a vote as membership of the EU or not should tbh not have a vote in the first place!

If any remainers dont like the fact that the UK is leaving the EU then they still have time to up sticks and move to an EU country like Ireland/ France etc if you think live inside the EU is so great!"

On the small iPhone bit it counts for all of us, me included. If you're not happy about anything it can of course be edited straight away by yourself upon reading and checking or later by a mod (I would imagine there are more Leave mods than Remain mods if that puts your mind at rest)

Far from wanting to shut down any debate, I'd prefer to debate. To debate it actually takes two to engage in what the other has written, hence the request to understand what is written and to reply

I hardly think there is any "policy" especially as to shut down Leave debate would likely be at odds with the owner of this site !!

What you tend to do (if I may be as bold) is come in guns blazing accusing and being quite pejorative in your descriptions of anyone that does not support your view of the day.

From my side - and in reply to some of your original comebacks - like @neilo I don't like the implications of Mercosur and can recall commenting as such maybe 18 months ago on here

Here is one thread from 2014 for a start:

George Eustace on food security

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Oral evidence:Food Security, HC 926 Wednesday 26 March 2014 Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on26 March 2014. Written evidence from witnesses: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Watch the meeting Members present...

thefarmingforum.co.uk

You may want to read George Eustace's comments and Guy Smith's reply at the time:

George Eustace on food security
"...and putting pressure on the EuropeanUnion to take that forward. We are also at the forefront of opening up markets elsewhere. The EU/Mercosur deal, for instance, is something else that we are promoting. The UK has a strong tradition of promoting free trade and it is something we are still..."

And Guy's reply at the time:

"Thanks for alerting me to that JP.

I agree with the comments.

On reading Mr Eustaces testimony you wonder if the UK Government really has moved away from Mrs Becketts mantra of ten years ago that home farming doesn't matter much because at the end of the day we can always import. You wonder how many other industries would have a government rep with no ambition to reverse a decline in UK farm production.

His dodgy history also needs correcting, apart from the last thirty years only once has our trade balance in food dropped at such an alarming pace and that was 1870-1900."


I have consistently stated I voted Remain and meaning Remain and Reform, as I am sure the EU will have to reform. It may well mean that a Brexit led recession in the EU post us leaving will speed up this reform.

Where I sit is now hoping the ramifications of the UK leaving are not as dire as predicted for the UK by some economists. We are still suffering from the 2008 bank crash and I've lived through 2 recessions. I'm 57 (almost) and may never live long enough to see the benefits as projected by Leave proponents (I don't hold short stock and investment options that I can cash the days after leaving like JRM) and although Fox has gone I really want to know what he's already signed under the table with Woody Johnson and Trump.

Maybe one day I will still be alive to see us apply to rejoin a newly shaped EEC trading bloc ?

For the meantime, I have no option but to work with nature, my soils and climate and put the tup in again when it suits my small flock and carry on with my native cattle programme. I do have options but none can be taken until I know what the final outcomes will be on 31 October 2019 and about 5-10 years hence.

 

[JP1]

Then on that we differ - I see it as being clear and frankly from anyone but a moderator would have suspected the quote as trolling, and - given the reaction - succesfull trolling at that.

But we are now a long way away from discussion of th £500M support so enough on brexit voter's rationale - I think you have moved the thread anyway

I promise there was no attempt at trolling. To have left the quote in full would have meant the highlighted paragraph would not have been visible to GUTH or anyone else unless they expanded the text box manually and that would have led to another can of worms and folks going off tangent

I have since re-published the entire GUTH post in one of my posts

Even if you made the comment innocently I resent the allegation of trolling.

 

[gone up the hill]

I promise there was no attempt at trolling. To have left the quote in full would have meant the highlighted paragraph would not have been visible to GUTH or anyone else unless they expanded the text box manually and that would have led to another can of worms and folks going off tangent

I have since re-published the entire GUTH post in one of my posts

Even if you made the comment innocently I resent the allegation of trolling.

My post that you have edited/ cut parts out of it posted then been pulled up for this and then you have reposted it again was certainly NOT incendiary as you claim!

Just a simple post from someone with a viewpoint that you disagree with so you then started name calling/ belittling that poster, for anyone else that would be called and is trolling and just because you are a moderator you seem to think you can say/do as you wish as the rules dont apply to you!

If a normal member had written some of your above posts they would have been deleted by a moderator!