>>
>> "SpamTrapSeeSig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > In article <[email protected]>, Graham G <[email protected]>
>> > writes
>> >>>>What irritates me is that the technology exists for biodiesel from
>> >>>>oil
>> >>>>seed
>> >>>>rape and the like, which would give farmers a valuable income in the
>> >>>>tough
>> >>>>climate we are in, and be more environmentally sound, yet the
>> >>>>government
>> >>>>won't give the investment or incentives to oil companies to do it.
>> >>>
>> >>> There's a basic flaw in that one, though, sadly - not enough
>> >>> crop-growing
>> >>> land. You can substitute a small percentage of fossil fuel with
>> >>> bio...
>> >>> Also, Oilseed rape is not in fact the most rewarding crop to get oil
>> >>> from,
>> >>> according to a list I saw somewhere.
>> >>>
>> >>> But even growing the more effective oil crops, there ain't enough
>> >>> land -
>> >>> you'd end up competing with food-growing area.
>> >>
>> >>Of course I accept that, however as a farmers son an living in the
>> >>farming
>> >>community I am well aware of the fact that UK food crops are becoming
>> >>less
>> >>and less marketable. Other countries with lowere labour rates, land
>> >>costs
>> >>and lower transport costs are able to produce it much cheaper than the
>> >>British farmer.
>> >
>> > Rubbish. That's only true if you accept the obscenity of the CAP.
>> >
>> > Put British agriculture on a level playing field with the rest, and
>> > transport costs alone would decide the matter.
>>
>> You obviously live a sheltered life. CAP and the arable area aid payment
>> will be done away with by 2015. They are being reduced on a sliding
>> scale.
>> The playing field is never level. The US subsidise their farmers, as do
>> Canada. France invests vast sums into theirs, they have different laws
>> about
>> redundancy, Russia gives tax relief for machinery purchase,
>
> The UK gives tax relief on machiney purchase too (capital investment).
Thats not stictly true, you can offset tax against its depreciation but
nothing more. The goverment used to give further tax relief but that was
done away with in the eighties.
>> I could go on.
>> Transport has a bearing on the costs of production but when in poland the
>> average wage is less than a quarter of ours, their fuel has less tax,
>> their
>> land is two thirds of the price, they have more of it, tell me how the
>> british farmer can compete with that. Its pure economics and has bugger
>> all
>> to do with CAP. All said and done every other european country recieves
>> support to a similar level and we cannot compete.
>>
>> My best friend is a dairy farmer, or was. He has just sold up because he
>> was
>> producing at 16ppl (below UK average) and recieved 18ppl. The final straw
>> was his only employee asking for a pay rise to 6.50 an hour. I suggest my
>> friend you study European and world agricultural policy as well as world
>> economics in as much detail as I have before you pass comment on things
>> that
>> you do not fully understand.
>>
>
> So why is farming special? All of the above applies to maufacturing just
> as much.
I did actually say that manufacturing is as bad. The major difference is
that if you build a car, you don't then ask the consumer what they are
willing to pay for that car. You produce a product and that product is then
sold at nett plus margin. In farming you grow corn, then phone around and
try to get people to buy it, thats a bit over simplistic, but thats
basically what happens. The result is that the price of the commodity can be
driven down to the point where costs of production are higher than income.
Did your farmer friend buy British - or did he have an imported
> 4x4, tractors, other plant etc etc? If not he can hardly complain about
> not being supported by the UK consumer!
There isn't a british tractor, and very little british machinery so you can
hardly blame him for not buying british. The last true british tractor went
over ten years ago. Ha gone the way of the car industry. Further to that, I
would argue that if his costs of production are to be kept low so that he
may stay in business, then he must buy the cheapest, where ever that may
come from. Thats the basic proble, we can all go on about supporting home
grown companies, but inevitably we buy the cheapest in most cases. You could
argue that by buying a new landrover you are supporting american business.
Ok the jobs are here but the profit goes over the water. Its a similar
story.
As for 4x4, he hasn't got one, couldn't justify running one.
That's world economics - if you
> buy as cheap as you can with no thought of consequences eventually your
> sector will get it's turn to be on the receiving end - and an applcation
> form for employment at McDonalds.
I agree, but then traditionally British farmers have bought British or the
best they can afford, since it is their livelihood that relies on that
input. Hence why Massey ferguson at one point had 98% combine share and 70%
tractor share in this country. Since then it has been bought by an American
corporation. I think it is overly simplistic and nieve to believe that the
enviroment the UK farmer finds himself in is self inflicted.
As for my friends job, he has a degree in agriculture, years of management
experience, but because he has only ever worked on his own farm he has no
references and so now weorks in a local supermarket for £5.50/hour. I
suggest you tell him its his own fault he is there.
> Just wait until the Germans buy the London Stock Exchange (they've failed
> so far, but they will get it) and move it to Berlin/Frankfurt - we will
> then have no control over our economy at all. In fact we won't have an
> economy since we no longer make anything.
And I would say that it is self inflicted. If British cars, eg Rover were
any good they would still be around. Its their own fault they are unemployed
cos they did a poor job. Oops maybe thats simplistic. Thats my point unless
you fully understand the history, you cannot understand how we have arrived
where we have.
