[Observatory]

(Original post by tehFrance)
Do you think I am a lefty? I am a wealthy Conservative... please don't associate me with the left. Also that is not what I am saying, I am saying they should learn to control their spending, if they continue to spend on non-essential items more than essential items then quite frankly they do deserve to struggle, if they only buy essential items and still struggle then I don't mind helping those people out with government support. Those that squander should get nothing.

Yeah, I know, but people like you are such a minute constituency that they can't get anything passed. Bad laws like this are mostly supported by well-meaning but muddle-headed people rather than monsters who think the poor "deserve to struggle" if it means that farmers, who own businesses and land, get to have more money!

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Observatory)
Yeah, I know, but people like you are such a minute constituency that they can't get anything passed. Bad laws like this are mostly supported by well-meaning but muddle-headed people rather than monsters who think the poor "deserve to struggle" if it means that farmers, who own businesses and land, get to have more money!

This isn't even a ****ing law, it is a motion.

Why do you assume all farmers are rich? of all the farmers I know, very few are rich and are in actual fact as poor as the next poor person yet you don't see them complaining as much as them do you? all they ask is a fair price for their produce and I will force people to give it to them if I have to.

I am not a socialist and don't normally support subsidies but for agriculture I shall.

[Observatory]

(Original post by tehFrance)
This isn't even a ****ing law, it is a motion.

Why do you assume all farmers are rich? of all the farmers I know, very few are rich and are in actual fact as poor as the next poor person yet you don't see them complaining as much as them do you? all they ask is a fair price for their produce and I will force people to give it to them if I have to.

I am not a socialist and don't normally support subsidies but for agriculture I shall.

I doubt most are rich compared to people who own factories or have top flight professional jobs, but compared to most people? Most people don't even own their own homes let alone a lot of land, animals and machinery.

It furthermore makes absolutely no sense to say the poor deserve everything get due to making bad choices, and then say dairy farmers should be bailed out because they choose to stay in an industry that has terrible margins and declining profitability. How is that any different to bailing someone out because they work in a shop and that doesn't pay very much? Or because they don't have a job at all?

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Observatory)
I doubt most are rich compared to people who own factories or have top flight professional jobs, but compared to most people? Most people don't even own their own homes let alone a lot of land, animals and machinery.

It furthermore makes absolutely no sense to say the poor deserve everything get due to making bad choices, and then say dairy farmers should be bailed out because they choose to stay in an industry that has terrible margins and declining profitability. How is that any different to bailing someone out because they work in a shop and that doesn't pay very much? Or because they don't have a job at all?

Most people don't own homes? WTF are you on about?

Do you know how the farmers have these houses and all the land? it has been passed down to them generation at a time, farming is a generational industry... it is not one that people go into lightly and takes years of training and experience to get right.

Why are you saying that I think the entire poor get what they deserve? it is only the poor that spend their money on crap that deserve to struggle as they cannot live within their means, if they struggle while living within their means then fine, help them out but not those that spend, spend, spend as if they are wealthy.

You clearly understand nothing of the agricultural industry, I bet you are a city boy... if you had have experience within the industry you would understand why people stay in the industry. There is a lot of good that comes from them.

All I can say, is that all those that don't think the farmers should get the fair money are completely stupid. It is only a couple of pence, I doubt it would even affect anyone yet you are crying as if it several pounds on top of a bottle of milk when it is not and it is going to kill the poor.

[jesusandtequila]

(Original post by tehFrance)
JESUS CHRIST I DO!!!!

Then why do you keep ignoring these things and spitting out strawmen and platitudes?

You have heard of farm shops right? it is already done and they are successful. You just don't see anyone on JSA in those shops... and quite rightly so tbh.

Yeah, but you can sell all types of milk in a supermarket too. I know, shock horror. Indeed, some people already do it. Cravendale, for example?

Why because I believe in supporting the local economy not the economy of some country I don't care for and I believe everyone should do the same... I am French, we are protectionist by nature.

Supporting the British economy does not mean taxing people to subsidise one indsutry. If you want to talk about the effects of subsidies on jobs then you should watch these two things first:





This won't help the UK economy. It just favours a special interest group at the expense of consumers. The poorest elsewhere in the world as well. See this is why I say you can't read.

I don't think that we should force the farmers to accept the loss and then go out of business, I'd rather force people to pay the pennies extra than see farmers in this country go out of work just so some 3rd world cutting corners farmer can thrive. I care just as much about the environment as I do the local economy and outsourcing to the 3rd world will be a disaster environmentally.

Should we force any business to accept the loss then? Why force manufacturing to accept the loss and let the factory owners and labourers go out of work and have stuff produced by some cutting corner China factory?

I mean Jesus.

Also we need to legalise GM Foods ASAP, it will bring yields up, lower costs and feed more people... but the idiots that are the public don't understand this and quite frankly as they are so stupid deserve to suffer in their own ignorance to something that could help solve world hunger.

Yeah, sure. We should legalise this. But that doesn't change whether we should subsidise this or anything else.

[obi_adorno_kenobi]

This thread sums up what happens when the Libers turn up, it gets acrimonious. God I hate you all.

[D.R.E]

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
This thread sums up what happens when the Libers turn up, it gets acrimonious. God I hate you all.

We just get easily frustrated 'cos we're always right and no one listens.

[obi_adorno_kenobi]

(Original post by D.R.E)
We just get easily frustrated 'cos we're always right and no one listens.

But you all seem to have quite disgusting personalities. With the slight exception of J+T, none of you are people I'd want to be in the same room with. I don't hold that view for many people but you Libers on here are repulsively arrogant. I'm sure you sometimes have a point but you could do with being nicer about it.

[D.R.E]

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
But you all seem to have quite disgusting personalities. With the slight exception of J+T, none of you are people I'd want to be in the same room with. I don't hold that view for many people but you Libers on here are repulsively arrogant. I'm sure you sometimes have a point but you could do with being nicer about it.

Probably. I do think that's not entirely fair though. I obviously can't say much because I am definitely not the nicest person in the world, but the party in general has a lot of decent people, who unfortunately have less interest in posting on TSR than I do, hence the bad impression.

Besides, it's very easy for people to be forceful in argument when it's on a forum, I've met quite a few people from the party and they would definitely be nice people to be 'in the same room with'.

[obi_adorno_kenobi]

(Original post by D.R.E)
Probably. I do think that's not entirely fair though. I obviously can't say much because I am definitely not the nicest person in the world, but the party in general has a lot of decent people, who unfortunately have less interest in posting on TSR than I do, hence the bad impression.

Besides, it's very easy for people to be forceful in argument when it's on a forum, I've met quite a few people from the party and they would definitely be nice people to be 'in the same room with'.

I've never met a nice Liber either here or on the net in general. Oh well, I knew to avoid you all I guess.

[Angry cucumber]

(Original post by jesusandtequila)
So, people are resistant to change but it doesn't mean we shouldn't. I think it's heartless to force people to subsidise this, by taking their money with the threat of violence behind it. This is what subsidies really are. Other people's money.

Who's threatening the violence? Parking a tractor outside a depo is hardly violent. This motion and what the farmers are asking for, is not for a governmental subsidy for milk. It is asking for the companies to buy milk at a fair price - 30p a litre, rather than the ~ 27p that was being paid earlier this year, which has now been dropped for some farmers as low as ~ 23p. Not fair in anybodies book

Your argument seems to be that because it'll be a pain in the arse to change, so let's keep subsidising a loss-making industry (that is, one that isn't producing the things that people want at the price they are willing to pay). I don't think that's right. I don't think we should be propping them up, and if they need to change what they farm in response to consumers not wanting what they currently farm at the current price, then that's a good, not a bad thing.

Milk isn't subsidised. Aspects of farming are subsidised, but this is mostly to help farmers afford, changes to there farms, which improve environmental, animal quality of life etc. Cereal prices are subsidised at times, to help keep the price of stable foods down.

So? So if it's more expensive to import it then supermarkets won't import it, they'll buy off British farmers. If here is truly cheaper (after transport costs), then supermarkets will have to pay a higher price for milk to farmers, as we constantly nudge the market towards what would be equilibrium. At the moment, we're well oversupplied, which is why these farmers make a loss.

We are truly cheaper and we aren't over supplied in milk, hence why the price of milk is ridiculous. It's not like the amount of money being asked for is huge. Say all the price increase to make it fair are passed onto consumers (on pre cut in price cut of milk this year, levels; so a rise of ~ 3p a litre) say you drink one pint of milk a day (a fair enough amount, about 0.6 of a litre) and you drink that everyday 365, the amount extra you will be paying a year on milk will be ~ £6.60. Relatively negligible, in comparison to the increase of utilities prices etc.

It depends what they choose to farm instead of dairy cattle, and how much of an effect British dairy farming has on the world price. I think that if you farm other meat or cereals instead of dairy farming (and it might well be a different individual farmer on the same plot after one goes out of business), then you'd see the prices of them come down, not go up. Oh, and also British farming is tiny, and the effect on world prices is negligible.

Even then, it misses the wider point. That prices are a signal - if the price of x goes up it's a signal for farmers to produce more of it, and likewise if the price of y goes down, then it's a signal to produce less. Luckily, the signal also acts as an incentive. I don't see that government needs to step in here, but we just need to let the price mechanism work.

British farming is tiny I think this proves how little you know about farming tbh... British farming is a bit of a beast tbh.... Just for an example, we export 59, 601 tonnes of sheep meat to France alone. The total export of sheep meat from Britain is worth to the British economy is £3.81 billion.(Source EBLEX.) We are also the stock yard of the world, exporting thousands of animals world wide every year. I can assure you, if our prices rise the worlds prices rises, end of.

It's a nice thought, just to leave the market, to it's work and crush an industry into the ground. Shame that people's lives are being ruined and forced into rural poverty. Leaving the unregualted market do it's work, has done splendidly in other parts of the country hasn't it.... I mean Central Cornwall, parts of Wales, the North East (e.g. Sunderland) are prime examples of how allowing the market to collapse has led to wide scale economic improvement. *Sarcasm* My examples of mining and Ship building isn't even that good, as those industries were un-renewable souces... Farming is renewable and will keep going until the end of humanity/ we find a way to produce food, without the need for animals and plants.

So with a housing shortage in the UK, building more houses is met because some people will miss the neighbour? And hang on, if houses are built there, won't it cease to be countryside? Furthermore, what about planning permission? Whether the council should sell it off or not is a completely separate issue to whether we should be stealing to support an industry that can't produce the things people want at the right prices.

Seen as the government relaxed laws on building on green belt land, your answer is less than satisfactory. Also rural house prices more often than not are more expensive than what your average person can buy. Hence a lot of new houses are built with people buying second homes in mind. Coastal Cornwall is a prime example of this.. some of it is absolutely deserted out of peak holiday season.

Yeah, and it's not going to be replaced with just empty land, but with something that is more productive and ties in more with the preferences of the people - that is, something that doesn't make a loss. This might be different farming or anything else, which also produces jobs. So does not taking money to subsidise, since people spend that money on other things, and creates dispersed jobs elsewhere.

You're just saying words, stuff and things... that whole sentence sounds lovely, but actually means nought. Switching to another type of farming, is a difficult issue as I discussed in my last post. Whilst creating new jobs, well it might, but not for those people left without related jobs to dairying. Large Animal veterinary is relatively specialized now a days, (Practices like the days of James Herriot, mixed practice vets, are getting fewer and farther between ) so they're left with less work. Whilst the agricultural builders are left with less work.. I could go on. Also, it's currently the deepest recession since the 1930's, where is all this money coming from for all these new jobs.

We should not focus on the seen and ignore the unseen.

What on earth is this for a sentence.

In conclusion, the Dairy industry is not a loss making industry, if the industry plays fair and doesn't rinse Dairy farmers of money. You cannot apply pure Libertarian views on farming, as unlike most aspects of the economy it is emotionally attached to the people who work in it and is passed down generation to generation. Farmers by their nature are entrepreneurs by their very nature and try to make a profit on what poor prices they are paid

[jesusandtequila]

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
But you all seem to have quite disgusting personalities. With the slight exception of J+T, none of you are people I'd want to be in the same room with. I don't hold that view for many people but you Libers on here are repulsively arrogant. I'm sure you sometimes have a point but you could do with being nicer about it.

I can be ranging anywhere from a calm and reasoned debater to a horrible antagonistic **** while debating politics, I'll admit. It really depends on how the other person responds - but at least I try (generally) to start off nice. I'll take the slight exception as a complement, but do appreciate that discussing politics isn't generally when you're going to see everyone's nicest side.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by jesusandtequila)
Then why do you keep ignoring these things and spitting out strawmen and platitudes?

Yeah, but you can sell all types of milk in a supermarket too. I know, shock horror. Indeed, some people already do it. Cravendale, for example?

Supporting the British economy does not mean taxing people to subsidise one industry.

This won't help the UK economy. It just favours a special interest group at the expense of consumers. The poorest elsewhere in the world as well. See this is why I say you can't read.

Should we force any business to accept the loss then? Why force manufacturing to accept the loss and let the factory owners and labourers go out of work and have stuff produced by some cutting corner China factory?

I mean Jesus.

Yeah, sure. We should legalise this. But that doesn't change whether we should subsidise this or anything else.

Because I enjoy it

No **** sherlock, I could sell my own **** via a supermarket if I wanted to

That is true however when the corporations are not giving people a fair deal and I don't expect this to apply to all industries but when an entire industry are working from 05:00 to 22:00 and not even getting minimum wage in come cases, I do expect that they are helped out. I will gladly force people to help out.

What are you talking about now... "the poorest elsewhere in the world as well"

I am sorry have you seen the profits of supermarkets lately? they can take a hit of a few measly pence for crying out loud. Hell most consumers can too.

I mean Jesus... you sure as hell bring Jesus into this a lot don't you? mentioning Jesus does nothing for me, I don't believe in him to be some sort of messiah... I am not a 'Jew for Jesus' so stop bringing him into it.

I am not asking you to, if we had GM, you wouldn't need to once it is off the ground, it pays for itself but you and other people like you are so blinded by your own ignorance you cannot see the benefits, financial and otherwise.

[Observatory]

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
But you all seem to have quite disgusting personalities. With the slight exception of J+T, none of you are people I'd want to be in the same room with. I don't hold that view for many people but you Libers on here are repulsively arrogant.

You are also an utter bastard and I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.

Pleased to meet you by the way.

[jesusandtequila]

(Original post by Angry cucumber)
Who's threatening the violence? Parking a tractor outside a depo is hardly violent. This motion and what the farmers are asking for, is not for a governmental subsidy for milk. It is asking for the companies to buy milk at a fair price - 30p a litre, rather than the ~ 27p that was being paid earlier this year, which has now been dropped for some farmers as low as ~ 23p. Not fair in anybodies book

So because the price dropped it's unfair? If farmers wish to campaign for a higher price, sure, be my guest but it doesn't mean government should be getting involved.

Milk isn't subsidised. Aspects of farming are subsidised, but this is mostly to help farmers afford, changes to there farms, which improve environmental, animal quality of life etc. Cereal prices are subsidised at times, to help keep the price of stable foods down.

Yeah, British farming received 3.755 billion euros in subsidies. I'm aware milk isn't subsidised but I'm calling for government not to be involved in market interventions here. They shouldn't either price-fix or subsidise - two options that have been talked about. Considering the motion is so vague I don't see that it's wrong to argue against this here.

We are truly cheaper and we aren't over supplied in milk, hence why the price of milk is ridiculous. It's not like the amount of money being asked for is huge. Say all the price increase to make it fair are passed onto consumers (on pre cut in price cut of milk this year, levels; so a rise of ~ 3p a litre) say you drink one pint of milk a day (a fair enough amount, about 0.6 of a litre) and you drink that everyday 365, the amount extra you will be paying a year on milk will be ~ £6.60. Relatively negligible, in comparison to the increase of utilities prices etc.

So why doesn't someone do it, if it would still be profitable to sell milk having bought it at 30p/litre. The farmers would happily sell, and consumers would happily pay the premium, right? So if you believe it, go out there and make a huge big load of profit. Seriously. I'm gonna make you rich here.

British farming is tiny I think this proves how little you know about farming tbh... British farming is a bit of a beast tbh.... Just for an example, we export 59, 601 tonnes of sheep meat to France alone. The total export of sheep meat from Britain is worth to the British economy is £3.81 billion.(Source EBLEX.) We are also the stock yard of the world, exporting thousands of animals world wide every year. I can assure you, if our prices rise the worlds prices rises, end of.

Yeah, it's 0.6% of our GDP (in 2009, and shrinking). Massive. The drop in Q2 2012 GDP? More than wiping out all of the farming in Britain. That compares with 6.1% of world GDP for world agriculture. Farming is not big in Britain, either compared to other British industry or world farming.

It's a nice thought, just to leave the market, to it's work and crush an industry into the ground. Shame that people's lives are being ruined and forced into rural poverty. Leaving the unregualted market do it's work, has done splendidly in other parts of the country hasn't it.... I mean Central Cornwall, parts of Wales, the North East (e.g. Sunderland) are prime examples of how allowing the market to collapse has led to wide scale economic improvement. *Sarcasm* My examples of mining and Ship building isn't even that good, as those industries were un-renewable souces... Farming is renewable and will keep going until the end of humanity/ we find a way to produce food, without the need for animals and plants.

Yeah, these places all have really really low levels of state spending as the proportion of GDP. They're fine examples of leaving things to the market. We would do far better to trade to get food and sell the things we're good at producing, not the things we're bad at. If we truly are the cheapest, then that would be reflected when supply falls and supermarkets choose to pay the higher milk price from Britain rather than pay the transport costs.

Seen as the government relaxed laws on building on green belt land, your answer is less than satisfactory. Also rural house prices more often than not are more expensive than what your average person can buy. Hence a lot of new houses are built with people buying second homes in mind. Coastal Cornwall is a prime example of this.. some of it is absolutely deserted out of peak holiday season.

Okay, so? As for rural house prices being more expensive? Yeaaaah - cities are way cheaper.

You're just saying words, stuff and things... that whole sentence sounds lovely, but actually means nought. Switching to another type of farming, is a difficult issue as I discussed in my last post. Whilst creating new jobs, well it might, but not for those people left without related jobs to dairying. Large Animal veterinary is relatively specialized now a days, (Practices like the days of James Herriot, mixed practice vets, are getting fewer and farther between ) so they're left with less work. Whilst the agricultural builders are left with less work.. I could go on. Also, it's currently the deepest recession since the 1930's, where is all this money coming from for all these new jobs.

If a farmer goes out of business and sells his farm. What happens? Does it lay empty? Does someone else buy it? If someone else buys it, do they leave it empty? Do they do something else with it? Nope. They try to produce something with it. If that's not profitable, then they again sell it on. That is until someone makes a profit. What is a profit? It's producing something that people are willing to pay for. That is, meeting the desires and wants of the people - ie. satisfying their preferences. I hope the sentence is a little clearer now.

What on earth is this for a sentence.

Bastiat. If you didn't grasp the point from that sentence, watch the video I posted to tehFrance (both, in fact, would be helpful here). Or, you could read.

In conclusion, the Dairy industry is not a loss making industry, if the industry plays fair and doesn't rinse Dairy farmers of money. You cannot apply pure Libertarian views on farming, as unlike most aspects of the economy it is emotionally attached to the people who work in it and is passed down generation to generation. Farmers by their nature are entrepreneurs by their very nature and try to make a profit on what poor prices they are paid

The problem is, no-one has defined what makes the price 'unfair' except that either they personally think it's too low or that it's fallen. Once anyone has failed to do that, they make emotional appeals to the jobs of farmers, without considering the jobs that are lost elsewhere (but dispersed) and thus are unseen. See above for Bastiat.

[jesusandtequila]

(Original post by tehFrance)
Because I enjoy it

No **** sherlock, I could sell my own **** via a supermarket if I wanted to

That is true however when the corporations are not giving people a fair deal and I don't expect this to apply to all industries but when an entire industry are working from 05:00 to 22:00 and not even getting minimum wage in come cases, I do expect that they are helped out. I will gladly force people to help out.

What are you talking about now... "the poorest elsewhere in the world as well"

I am sorry have you seen the profits of supermarkets lately? they can take a hit of a few measly pence for crying out loud. Hell most consumers can too.

I mean Jesus... you sure as hell bring Jesus into this a lot don't you? mentioning Jesus does nothing for me, I don't believe in him to be some sort of messiah... I am not a 'Jew for Jesus' so stop bringing him into it.

I am not asking you to, if we had GM, you wouldn't need to once it is off the ground, it pays for itself but you and other people like you are so blinded by your own ignorance you cannot see the benefits, financial and otherwise.

This has ceased to be a sensible debate.

[Observatory]

Actually I'm sorry for arguing with 'tehFrance'. I think it is probably a troll account.

[obi_adorno_kenobi]

(Original post by Observatory)
You are also an utter bastard and I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.

Pleased to meet you by the way.

To derisory half people like you? Absolutely.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by jesusandtequila)
This has ceased to be a sensible debate.

It ceased to be a sensible debate when you waded in with your ridiculously stupid libertarian views on the matter.

Yes the government should not normally get involved however this is an industry that is screwed over more than any other and quite frankly that is wrong and thus I feel that the government should step in and protect the industry. Yes I am looking at it from a French perspective, where agriculture is very much sustained by the government and where we do pay more for the food in some cases but it is worth it.

I will always buy local, I never buy cheap crap and I always make sure that I am buying from somewhere that pays farmers fairly for their produce. I can still live on under £30pw so why can't others? go on answer me that, I pay more yet still am able to eat an abundance of food for under £30pw when most people seem to struggle.

I find the whole "oh the poor, think of the poor" to be bull****, they bring it upon themselves with their own reckless spending as they could live on the same that I do and not die.

[Observatory]

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
To derisory half people like you? Absolutely.

I don't actually know who you are by the way, so I don't actually hate you. I just thought your "You guys are completely worthless human beings. Oh by the way you are not very nice to others." post was completely hilarious.

Like a "No ****ing swearing" sign without the irony.