Hilly
Member
- Location
- Scottish Borders.
Don’t pay take it away !And do you seriously think China will cough up any carbon tax, god help any tax inspector who goes out to collect it!
Don’t pay take it away !And do you seriously think China will cough up any carbon tax, god help any tax inspector who goes out to collect it!
ByeWell he won't come back !!
Yes, for hee hawMaybe true in Scottyland, down here it'd be more like 50:50.
LOTS of farmland here changed hands in the 1930s & 1940s.
Maybe but thats how its valued now,True but many are looking for a return on an "investment" that was made generations ago, often at much lower relative prices.
That's just (agent encouraged) greed.
NoThe diversity of breeds of cattle and sheep in the UK are part of our problem. NZ did away with all that under Rogernomics as it just wasn't viable. They run very few, clearly "fit for purpose", breeds.
Yes, for hee haw
Its jockney rhyming slang
Not sure your point. Certainly not applicable down here.
The economy had crashed, much worse than we've seen recently. Many Manorial estates around here were sold off as they couldn't afford to keep them. Land lay idle because nobody wanted it. Those who had funds (often not the land owning gentry you seem to despise) picked up farms for almost nothing. Many were Scots.
Then, from the 60s onwards working farmers competed to buy up any farms that came free. 2 neighbours of ours assembled farms over 1000 acres by the mid 70s, very big in those days. All paid for from working farm income.
Since then the value of farm land has become completely disassociated from what it can earn. It's now an asset class, not a production asset.
I'm well aware of that also.While a common language maybe used, perceptions of words may have different meaning or uses when used in other parts of the world, ie feedlots tend to be outdoors or a dairy farm with Holstein's indoors 24/7.
Yes but they were working farmers who bought back then
Not sure your point. Certainly not applicable down here.
The economy had crashed, much worse than we've seen recently. Many Manorial estates around here were sold off as they couldn't afford to keep them. Land lay idle because nobody wanted it. Those who had funds (often not the land owning gentry you seem to despise) picked up farms for almost nothing. Many were Scots.
Then, from the 60s onwards working farmers competed to buy up any farms that came free. 2 neighbours of ours assembled farms over 1000 acres by the mid 70s, very big in those days. All paid for from working farm income.
Since then the value of farm land has become completely disassociated from what it can earn. It's now an asset class, not a production asset.
All comes to market sooner or later one way or tother look at The Duke of B he’s selling lots off .Yes but they were working farmers who bought back then
Still plenty aristocracy owning land they got for free or actually stole
In the high country today , need my oxygen mask [emoji1787]I know, just having a laugh
need a lighter tractorIn the high country today , need my oxygen mask [emoji1787]View attachment 967740View attachment 967741
And just how would HMRC come up with the CO2 figure to put on the cost of each individual item from each individual supplier, a cost that is paid for by the voting public who rather like cheap goods..... its also would not be allowed under WTO rules, it wouldn't allow HMRC to apply different tarrifs to the same product depending on where, who and how it was produced.Doesn't need to. You add it to their exports when they land.
need a lighter tractor
Agreed. Even at that scale it could be a full income (taking to slaughter and direct selling high quality, fully traceable, meat). Some who've gone down this route have had (relatively) large lumps of pillar 2 funding for their processing and retail facilities.OP writes and describes a small farm, all permeant pasture with poor access. Land you would apparently struggle to even rent out. Then states that owners have basically been doing it as a hobby keeping cattle for others to buy and finish. Owners complain that without BPS money they won't do their hobby as it's not economic to do so.
I don't want to upset anyone but we need to be serious here- we are describing is money being taken from the tax payer and now we are complaining that without this cash such an enterprise doesn't stack up? Exactly when or how has it ever stacked up, with or without the involvement of subsidies?
I am no livestock farmer but I know people who would consider 50 acres and 50 beasts as a few hours a day of work at most, something they would readily fit in alongside other enterprises or jobs. Not a hobby but an enterprise they would keep ticking over but not expect to become filthy rich from.
With all due respect, there needs to be a bit of a reality check I think.
This is the point, what do the government want ?Agreed. Even at that scale it could be a full income (taking to slaughter and direct selling high quality, fully traceable, meat). Some who've gone down this route have had (relatively) large lumps of pillar 2 funding for their processing and retail facilities.
Subsidy shouldn't be supporting a hobby. Or should it if it delivers the public goods?
But they've said in their "Agriculture transition plan" they want all farms to be profitable without subsidy by 2027.This is the point, what do the government want ?
cos at the moment they seem to be saying what they want then putting those that are already providing it out of business
Ha, farming in the uk is mostly a hobbyAgreed. Even at that scale it could be a full income (taking to slaughter and direct selling high quality, fully traceable, meat). Some who've gone down this route have had (relatively) large lumps of pillar 2 funding for their processing and retail facilities.
Subsidy shouldn't be supporting a hobby. Or should it if it delivers the public goods?