Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The A50
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="holwellcourtfarm" data-source="post: 7735501" data-attributes="member: 42914"><p>I assume it was a satirical post but it does make an underlying point. Competition and the free market are not working. Environmentally they are a huge part of the problem.</p><p></p><p>Economists, clever as they are, have so far been unable or unwilling to cost in the impacts of free market economic activity on society, ecology, climate or a number of other areas. Effectively they profit by allowing society and/ or the planet to pick up their "external" costs. This was described brilliantly by Professor DasGupta earlier this year in his landmark report <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review</a></p><p></p><p>I used to work for a private consultancy undertaking drainage survey. We were one of a number of such businesses providing the service to the water industry. We regularly found ourselves winning contracts on price and quality which required us to travel long distances to undertake survey in areas close to the offices of other competing contractors. The net effect is lots of vehicles passing each other on the road every day to deliver a service which could have been delivered locally. The ecological and climate cost of that was simply ignored in the contracts.</p><p></p><p>We were only one small example in a very small field of business.</p><p></p><p>In "free market" terms this is good because it generates huge GDP growth. In most other ways it's a catastrophe.</p><p></p><p>The food distribution and retail system is the same, only much bigger.</p><p></p><p>Btw, there's a lot of arable in North Shropshire so notperhaps it's the best place for the spring calvers......... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="holwellcourtfarm, post: 7735501, member: 42914"] I assume it was a satirical post but it does make an underlying point. Competition and the free market are not working. Environmentally they are a huge part of the problem. Economists, clever as they are, have so far been unable or unwilling to cost in the impacts of free market economic activity on society, ecology, climate or a number of other areas. Effectively they profit by allowing society and/ or the planet to pick up their "external" costs. This was described brilliantly by Professor DasGupta earlier this year in his landmark report [URL]https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review[/URL] I used to work for a private consultancy undertaking drainage survey. We were one of a number of such businesses providing the service to the water industry. We regularly found ourselves winning contracts on price and quality which required us to travel long distances to undertake survey in areas close to the offices of other competing contractors. The net effect is lots of vehicles passing each other on the road every day to deliver a service which could have been delivered locally. The ecological and climate cost of that was simply ignored in the contracts. We were only one small example in a very small field of business. In "free market" terms this is good because it generates huge GDP growth. In most other ways it's a catastrophe. The food distribution and retail system is the same, only much bigger. Btw, there's a lot of arable in North Shropshire so notperhaps it's the best place for the spring calvers......... ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The A50
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top