Who is REALLY paying for AG Subsidies???......... THE RICH

[Bossfarmer]

I doubt you will have 50 sucklers on the area of land which will carry 500 though ffs.

Who said anything about sucklers? I know of people fattening 500 head of cattle with under 30k of subs, i know of farmers fattening 50 on similar sized sub, who will be more affected?

 

[Bossfarmer]

You've failed to make a good argument for them yet.....



Subs in their current do nothing other than support an uneconomic business and increase the profits of a profitable one. It makes the rich richer and prevents young entrants entering the industry and stifles innovation. No industry has ever done well when the whole industry is subsidised. Agriculture in the UK is bloated and inefficient partly because subsidies allow for 'gentleman farming' whereby the pursuit of efficiency and profit is not important.


Im not against support or education in agriculture, im just against massive, indiscriminate support for business.

Dont you mean it makes the ones on the best land richer and those on poorer land in business, keeping domestic food supply and food security at a reasonable level

 

[Agrispeed]

Who said anything about sucklers? I know of people fattening 500 head of cattle with under 30k of subs, i know of farmers fattening 50 on similar sized sub, who will be more affected?

The one who is running a crap,inefficient business?

Sub is area based, so why has one person got 10x the stock of the other but the same sub?

£30k BPS would be 350ac here give or take.

 

[Agrispeed]

Dont you mean it makes the ones on the best land richer and those on poorer land in business, keeping domestic food supply and food security at a reasonable level

why not make it LFA etc only then?

Do you consider domestic supply and security important, and if so why?

 

[Bossfarmer]

Perhaps he's right, in that some farmer's need to reassess their business model or reliance on high-tech kit/high inputs.

So were told we need to embrace technology when subs go and your saying the opposite

 

[Bossfarmer]

The one who is running a crap,inefficient business?

Sub is area based, so why has one person got 10x the stock of the other but the same sub?

£30k BPS would be 350ac here give or take.

He buys a lot of grain in and rents silage ground/does straw for dung swaps with a big estate

 

[glasshouse]

The one who is running a crap,inefficient business?

Sub is area based, so why has one person got 10x the stock of the other but the same sub?

£30k BPS would be 350ac here give or take.

Plenty with no stock at all on the same sub.
Plenty with no tractors, no stock, and no dirt on their hands but still get a huge subsidy

 

[FarmyStu]

plenty of sub systems are unjustifiable, trains are subsidised but I never use them, why the fudge should I pay for some rich sod to get to work, kids are subsidised but I don't have any why the hell should I pay for those that can't keep their knickers on, people can be imported ready to work for nothing waste of money producing our own

I'm not keen on subsidising trains either although your comparison is flawed.

To be comparable it would be transport as a whole that was subsidised. Irrespective of its ability to make a profit. Coaches, buses, trains, planes, cars, the whole lot. It would be insane wouldn't it? Yet that's how we subsidise "farmers" who happen to have a bit of land.

I've seen nothing on this thread to justify the current system.

I've worked with single old widows on walking frames who are getting subs as "active farmers". They haven't known what land they have, what they're growing or who's working it. All done by agents and contract farming. Totally and utterly unjustifiable. But people are still trying

 

[FarmyStu]

Youve failed to highlight that bad farmers can make money on good land

So long as they're making the money I don't have a problem with this. But I don't want bad farmers making a profit on good land simply because of the subsidy cheque they get!! They should fail. Nobody is owed a living.

 

[Bossfarmer]

I'm not keen on subsidising trains either although your comparison is flawed.

To be comparable it would be transport as a whole that was subsidised. Irrespective of its ability to make a profit. Coaches, buses, trains, planes, cars, the whole lot. It would be insane wouldn't it? Yet that's how we subsidise "farmers" who happen to have a bit of land.

I've seen nothing on this thread to justify the current system.

I've worked with single old widows on walking frames who are getting subs as "active farmers". They haven't known what land they have, what they're growing or who's working it. All done by agents and contract farming. Totally and utterly unjustifiable. But people are still trying

Either pay more for food or subsidise farmers the public can choose, although personally i think food security is too important an issue for such a small island with 60m people to decide on, the government must do the responsible thing and ensure the domestic food supply continues at any cost

 

[Bossfarmer]

So long as they're making the money I don't have a problem with this. But I don't want bad farmers making a profit on good land simply because of the subsidy cheque they get!! They should fail. Nobody is owed a living.

So ruin the entire ag industry just to bring down the bad farmers on good land?

 

[texel-tom]

Either pay more for food or subsidise farmers the public can choose, although personally i think food security is too important an issue for such a small island with 60m people to decide on, the government must do the responsible thing and ensure the domestic food supply continues at any cost

Really? The only time that food security has been an issue in recent history to my mind has been in wars of national survival, do you envisage one occurring in the near future?

 

[Agrispeed]

personally i think food security is too important an issue for such a small island with 60m people to decide on, the government must do the responsible thing and ensure the domestic food supply continues at any cost

What food security? We haven't been self sufficient since the corn laws, We are currently about 60% suffecient. I'd value trade links much more than becoming a isolationist nation, which IMO is much less secure in terms of natural disaster, and wars (as trade promotes dialogue).

 

[FarmyStu]

Either pay more for food or subsidise farmers the public can choose

Why pay more for food? What on earth makes you think food will be more expensive without subs?

But you are right about one thing, the public will decide. They will vote in a party at an election who has policies they agree with. Can you name a party at the minute that are promising to keep subs for rich landowners? Perhaps you could set one up and see what non landowner support you get. Good luck with that......

 

[Bossfarmer]

I hardly think theyre going to vote labour instead of conservative because of a miniscule part of the budget

 

[Bossfarmer]

Why pay more for food? What on earth makes you think food will be more expensive without subs?

But you are right about one thing, the public will decide. They will vote in a party at an election who has policies they agree with. Can you name a party at the minute that are promising to keep subs for rich landowners? Perhaps you could set one up and see what non landowner support you get. Good luck with that......

When the pound is weak it costs more to import

 

[Bossfarmer]

Also a shortage of food will cause food prices to rise this is inevitable

 

[orchard]

So were told we need to embrace technology when subs go and your saying the opposite

Embrace some technology---i'm not even going to complete this sentence, just do as you're told then BF, close thread

 

[brigadoon]

Also a shortage of food will cause food prices to rise this is inevitable

Ok - what is going to cause this inevitable shortage of food in the UK and when can we reasonably expect it to occur?

Just once - explain your rationale instead of banging on

And for heavens sake don't try to create a link between Uk subs and world food supply

 

[FarmyStu]

I hardly think theyre going to vote labour instead of conservative because of a miniscule part of the budget

What?? You think the Conservatives are in favour of the current sub system?? They are pro free market. I do hope you're not relying on them to deliver your free money!!

The point I was making was that there is no party in the UK supporting the current system. Not one. So the current sub system will end. No ifs or buts. Best thing you can do is get acquainted with Excel and work out how you can farm without the taxpayer. Or you could just keep flogging a dead horse on here.