Farm subsidies must be earned.......

[Hindsight]

If we are selling produce for 1970's prices in 2017, then it must be cheap, surely ?
Or am I missing something.......

I wonder sometimes if the owners of Intel think sometimes the same. Relative price of microchips now compared to the price in 1980s. Not maybe a good example but other industries face somewhat similar issues.

 

[7610 super q]

I wonder sometimes if the owners of Intel think sometimes the same. Relative price of microchips now compared to the price in 1980s. Not maybe a good example but other industries face somewhat similar issues.

That's a good point.....a Sinclair calculator in 1973 was......pricey..
Maybe it's just tractors/ machinery/ fert/ land/ ag chems etc that have risen out of proportion.....

 

[glasshouse]

Tagging cattle and getting passports are statutory requirements. You sub is irrelevant. Don't do it and you'll be closed down until you do. Just ask the vast amount of non claimants if they have to comply. Welcome to the world of not being paid for complying with the law, but being fined for not doing so.

So why do they deduct your subsidy for missing tags then? why not prosecute you?
without the subsidy stick, passports would never have got off the ground.
the horsemeat scandal shows what horseshit it is.

 

[glasshouse]

We've been tagging with RFID tags for years now, all movements have to be scanned & recorded. Electronically. No outdated paperwork. No one was subsidised for the cost of the tags or the RFID readers . . .
We can't sell cattle without them.


If you REALLY TRULY want to subsidise cheap food then the payments should go to Tescos, Sainsburys & all the other supermarket chains, that's where the real profit margins & discrepancy between what the farmer is paid & the consumer pays lies . . .

For everyone concerned about cheap food for the masses ( a worthy, egalitarian notion that warms the leftist cockles of my heart ) maybe you should push for the supermarkets to be subsidised. Hey, if they were, then maybe they could pay the producers more. Wow, I think I've stumbled on a great idea

All the subsidy goes into the supermarkets pocket eventually

 

[glasshouse]

So how much has your care worker invested in the care home,?
I have spent a lifetime being reasonably carefull, the farm has always had first call on any available money
rather than spending on holidays, cars or beer. Only thing i did spend was enough to trap a suitable girl into enslavement
50 years ago and that has proved to be a worthwhile investment, although she has provided the farm with a new generation
which rather dampens the desire to spend the accumulated wealth now

hope the suitable slave doesnt read this.

 

[Kiwi Pete]

Is 2017 wheat 2 times better than 1980 wheat?
Computer chips are exponentially better than they were, still talking binary, and wheat has changed very little other than making it easier to grow. Cattle are more productive, so are sheep, lambs finish quicker.. but still essentially the same produce as 400 years ago.
Why should bare, raw produce be expensive, and be getting more expensive?
The costs go up, and farmers can still afford to pay, so they spend more.
That that spending cash, is often not derived solely from profit from selling the produce, is the sticky wicket.
The extra bit, is what's done the damage.

But surely, if farm businesses aren't allowed to fail, then nobody should have to go hungry either?
When everyone on the planet can afford your "cheap" produce, then it's cheap. It's half price in the real world, or less.

 

[Kiwi Pete]

Would have thought anything that compromised animal welfare such as lambing would be unreasonable

That's what I thought!
(especially not the bit about lambs out in the sleet) but calling at short or no notice is just arrogant.

Maybe the NFU could lobby for them to bring some lube?

 

[rob1]

That's what I thought!
(especially not the bit about lambs out in the sleet) but calling at short or no notice is just arrogant.

Maybe the NFU could lobby for them to bring some lube?

The trouble here we have a group of people who love to get into positions where they can throw their weight about but hide behind the law as they havent got the balls to do it any other way, perhaps they have small dicks or their mum didnt cuddle them enough or they got their sweets knicked at school, they love to be awkward just because they can, no common sense or compromise

 

[Kiwi Pete]

The trouble here we have a group of people who love to get into positions where they can throw their weight about but hide behind the law as they havent got the balls to do it any other way, perhaps they have small dicks or their mum didnt cuddle them enough or they got their sweets knicked at school, they love to be awkward just because they can, no common sense or compromise

We have them here too, regional council twerps usually.
They can't cut off what I don't have
So guess what the answer is to visits out of the blue for 'environmental checks'?
come back when you know a thing about my environment!!
Money or no money, I'm sad that it's reached the stupendous level of stupidity that it has.

 

[glasshouse]

Best thing is to tell the inspectors you are away on holiday, and they can round up the cattle themselves if they want.

 

[DRC]

Just get rid of all subs for all farmers end of story.

Does that include our competitors in Europe.

 

[Bossfarmer]

A large field with interesting and varied flora and fauna to enable the chicken (who later dies peacefully of old age in their sleep) can live a fulfilled and interesting life?

Or a shitty stinking factory with limited air where staff need to spray the floors with high-pressure hoses to get rid of the rancid turd and bits of dead bird?

You get what you pay for, you keep it out of sight, you don't even have to worry about the non-existent ethics of such places, places that are bad for animals, employees and consumers.

pinched from the paper,


Why not, most care workerswill not be earning enough to pay much if any tax, so will not be contributing to subs. as it is the subs that enables cheap food to be produced here,
the subs are a reasonable way to get the high income earners to support the low earners. looking at the raw figers it is extremely efficient way of doing it.
for comparison, a dozen voters in the house of commons cost a reputed 1.5 billion, to keep a stable food production base along with a much appreciated rural landscape
cost 3 billion
When subs stop we will see the real cost of both and it will be way more money than currently spent

This is what the taxpayer needs to realise, the super rich pay most of the subs as they pay the most tax by far, the poor general public are getting much reduced weekly shopping bills and spending less and less of a % of their income on food

 

[thesilentone]

This is what the taxpayer needs to realise, the super rich pay most of the subs as they pay the most tax by far, the poor general public are getting much reduced weekly shopping bills and spending less and less of a % of their income on food

Absolute crap-trap.

We could import most of what we produce at a fraction of the cost........

 

[Hindsight]

for comparison, a dozen voters in the house of commons cost a reputed 1.5 billion, to keep a stable food production base along with a much appreciated rural landscape
cost 3 billion
When subs stop we will see the real cost of both and it will be way more money than currently spent

Devils advocate

£3 billion assuming UK population of 65 million is about £46 each per person. I suppose we could go the other way and remove the subsidy totally and see what happens. If the status qou us maintained it will cost the family of four £200 a year which would be on the shopping bill but their tax bill would reduce.

So you say 'way more money than currently' well unless there is profiteering by farmers without subsidy it will cost about £200 a year more - is that way more? Offset against the tax saved. And it would mean maybe less direct transfer of 'ordinary folks' income to large landowners as currently happens.

Hey ho good debate.

 

[Bossfarmer]

Rather appropriate this comment, given the thrust of the thread. Over that lifetime you have invested in your business, however so has the Careworker.

So, how much has the Careworker invested in the Carehome, well if it's Council funded, quite considerably via Income tax and council tax. In addition, the Careworker has invested in your business also. So, you owe the Careworkers, or am I being facetious ?

Whos to say the careworker isnt investing their wage i to a houseor even that they already own a house outright and are investing in but to let properties?

 

[glasshouse]

Absolute crap-trap.

We could import most of what we produce at a fraction of the cost........

Not with a weak pound we cant

 

[joe soapy]

Again maybe a tad disingenuous statement and sounds like an embittered farmer to me!! (said jokingly I assure you) Can think of several townies that have not sold the family silver. And as Mrs May found out a few weeks ago those folk tend to want to keep a hold of their acquired wealth to do as they please with it. Also I take you to task on equity release. Wealth per se does not altogether benefit the economy. The broader economy needs folk to spend cash to generate activity that then leads to work and thus jobs - so an equity release that someone spends on a holiday - maybe being spendthrift - but then that spend leads to economic activity, hotel staff, hotel building, airports - the list is endless. By having the 'wealth' just sat as a value in a house the economy just stifles - this is the difficulty we all have understanding our own wealth and views with the broader economy at large.

Ha, didnt really wish to sound bitter, well maybe just a bit. we live in a row of houses, so get a close up view.of life in the raw.
I tend to act like a convex mirror and reflect back what comes my way. two neighbours both the newest cars in the village courtesay of disabilty, not worked in the last forty years,
1 was chairman of the local footpath committee and was the most energetic dancer at a recent 60 ith birthday party, the other chased eldest and attacked him with a big walking stick.
pair of retired teachers close by pleading poverty, further down there is a new house going up replacing a recently built one and demolished,
The farm transport has to thread through cars parked haphazardly for nearly half a mile for access especialy as lot of the gear is 3 meters wide now, surprising how grumpy some are before 8 in the morn
Most are good as gold, but happily extend across their plot and then want access across field because they can no longer get to their back gardens
Most of the residents being elderly have huge asset base, but when i suggested they club together to buy an adjoining field to prevent building it was not viewed happily

 

[Bossfarmer]

Absolute crap-trap.

We could import most of what we produce at a fraction of the cost........

Not if there was a global supply deficit we would be held to randsome by the countries supplying us

 

[caveman]

This is what the taxpayer needs to realise, the super rich pay most of the subs as they pay the most tax by far, the poor general public are getting much reduced weekly shopping bills and spending less and less of a % of their income on food

It matters not where the tax comes from.
It's where it goes.
Hospitals and schools could do with more for a start........ and they support far more service providers, employment and income than AgUK ever will.

 

[Fossil]

This is what the taxpayer needs to realise, the super rich pay most of the subs as they pay the most tax by far, the poor general public are getting much reduced weekly shopping bills and spending less and less of a % of their income on food

How are the poor getting reduced bills? The EU import tariffs mean their basket costs far more than world market prices for e.g. Lamb.