Would you pay more for your milk?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by 1338
To answer your question I do live in the country and while I don't really know any farmers personally anymore I know they are rich 
You can't say someone isn't rich if they own enough land to sell it off and get a huge lump sum to become rich like the guy you said. There's a huge potential to make money on their land (otherwise it wouldn't be valued so highly), its just they decide to go against the obvious solution to stop producing milk if it is so unprofitable and produce something else. And as for the tenants it should be easy for them to change careers if there's no money in farming, right? Just like everyone else would do if their job was no longer needed.
You can't say someone isn't rich if they own enough land to sell it off and get a huge lump sum to become rich like the guy you said. There's a huge potential to make money on their land (otherwise it wouldn't be valued so highly), its just they decide to go against the obvious solution to stop producing milk if it is so unprofitable and produce something else. And as for the tenants it should be easy for them to change careers if there's no money in farming, right? Just like everyone else would do if their job was no longer needed.
Mostly land is not viable for all types of farming and even if it was a farmer would (most likely) have to spend millions on new farming equipment and may only have done one type of farming. If it's a long-term family run farm then the farmer has probably only worked on that one farm and has been doing it their whole life. A dairy farmer does not automatically know about arable farming or even different types of livestock farming.
Tenant farms are still often in a family for generations. A farmer and their family will live on the farm and the farmer may not have many qualifications if they grew up in a farming family and worked on the family farm after leaving school.
You're that selfish that you want to force families out of the house and community they've lived in for generations leaving them without a job rather than pay an extra 5p on a pint of milk?
Original post by MilitantMindset
If it's undervalued, don't sell to the person not willing to pay full price.
Except it's not undervalued.
Globally more food is produced than the world needs, in addition to this, farmers in South America and Africa produce yields for prices far below European farmers and what they produce is dumped because European countries refuse to buy that produce so as to artificially inflate the prices to maintain European farming.
This is what has driven farmers in the third world out of business, not Western colonialism or the legacy of the Empire, the continued protectionism of the wealthy nations forcing farmers from poor countries to dump their produce which then drives them out of the business, because the market in their home country does not exist. If anything food prices in the West have been propped up to support home farming.
Except it's not undervalued.
Globally more food is produced than the world needs, in addition to this, farmers in South America and Africa produce yields for prices far below European farmers and what they produce is dumped because European countries refuse to buy that produce so as to artificially inflate the prices to maintain European farming.
This is what has driven farmers in the third world out of business, not Western colonialism or the legacy of the Empire, the continued protectionism of the wealthy nations forcing farmers from poor countries to dump their produce which then drives them out of the business, because the market in their home country does not exist. If anything food prices in the West have been propped up to support home farming.
nobody is willing to buy it for full price - thats the issue, it costs 30p to produce and is only sold for 23p, farmers would rather get the 7p loss than a 30p loss
its not to do with colonialism (although i agree farmers in the third world are paid even less and really are exploited) its more to do with capitalist greed, no large company want to pay the full price when they can pay less and make a profit from it
Original post by citydeer
i agree that renewable energy is highly needed but in the 1980's it wasnt about renewable energy
the question was should we have helped the miners who were struggling (compared to farmers today) and yes we should have - we should support british produce (if thats crops/meat or materials) and we should support those in our society who are in need
the question was should we have helped the miners who were struggling (compared to farmers today) and yes we should have - we should support british produce (if thats crops/meat or materials) and we should support those in our society who are in need
Helping miners get a few years salary just to increase health and environmental complications in the future seems to be a terrible deal to me. I'm sure they would have been happy, but you have to take a look at the bigger picture.
We should have invested heavily in nuclear power instead. Now we're stuck somewhere in the middle where we don't have the coal or the nuclear power and have to buy it.
Original post by citydeer
i agree that renewable energy is highly needed but in the 1980's it wasnt about renewable energy
the question was should we have helped the miners who were struggling (compared to farmers today) and yes we should have - we should support british produce (if thats crops/meat or materials) and we should support those in our society who are in need
the question was should we have helped the miners who were struggling (compared to farmers today) and yes we should have - we should support british produce (if thats crops/meat or materials) and we should support those in our society who are in need
Why?
Artificially rigging the market in favour of British farmers means farmers in the third world go out of business whilst also driving up prices for the British consumer.
The same applies to the mining industry, this country was able to buy coal from foreign markets for lower prices than the cost of running mines so now we have far less black outs from all the striking as well as lower prices.
Learn this lesson, I don't love a British person I have never met, any more than I love an African or a South American I have never met, I owe you nothing, I owe British farmers nothing.
Original post by citydeer
nobody is willing to buy it for full price - thats the issue, it costs 30p to produce and is only sold for 23p, farmers would rather get the 7p loss than a 30p lossits not to do with colonialism (although i agree farmers in the third world are paid even less and really are exploited) its more to do with capitalist greed, no large company want to pay the full price when they can pay less and make a profit from it
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Fango_Jett
Helping miners get a few years salary just to increase health and environmental complications in the future seems to be a terrible deal to me. I'm sure they would have been happy, but you have to take a look at the bigger picture.
We should have invested heavily in nuclear power instead. Now we're stuck somewhere in the middle where we don't have the coal or the nuclear power and have to buy it.
We should have invested heavily in nuclear power instead. Now we're stuck somewhere in the middle where we don't have the coal or the nuclear power and have to buy it.
if youre worried about health then i dont think nuclear power is the answer, my point is in the 1980's it wasnt about health/renewable energy and i agree mining for coal is not a good way for energy (although neither is nuclear) you said yourself we have to import coal, yet we are sat on thousands of tonnes of coal we can no longer mine - however this isnt an argument about energy (and im not going to argue abt it anymore) its about supporting our british produce, something which should be done to avoid things such as now having to import coal
Why would I voluntarily pay more for anything? Why would anyone?
Original post by citydeer
if youre worried about health then i dont think nuclear power is the answer, my point is in the 1980's it wasnt about health/renewable energy and i agree mining for coal is not a good way for energy (although neither is nuclear) you said yourself we have to import coal, yet we are sat on thousands of tonnes of coal we can no longer mine - however this isnt an argument about energy (and im not going to argue abt it anymore) its about supporting our british produce, something which should be done to avoid things such as now having to import coal
If it costs less to buy coal than it does to pay British coal miners to dig coal, we should be buying coal.
Original post by MilitantMindset
Why?
Artificially rigging the market in favour of British farmers means farmers in the third world go out of business whilst also driving up prices for the British consumer.
The same applies to the mining industry, this country was able to buy coal from foreign markets for lower prices than the cost of running mines so now we have far less black outs from all the striking as well as lower prices.
Learn this lesson, I don't love a British person I have never met, any more than I love an African or a South American I have never met, I owe you nothing, I owe British farmers nothing.
Just because it costs 30p to produce, does not make 30p the true price.
Artificially rigging the market in favour of British farmers means farmers in the third world go out of business whilst also driving up prices for the British consumer.
The same applies to the mining industry, this country was able to buy coal from foreign markets for lower prices than the cost of running mines so now we have far less black outs from all the striking as well as lower prices.
Learn this lesson, I don't love a British person I have never met, any more than I love an African or a South American I have never met, I owe you nothing, I owe British farmers nothing.
Just because it costs 30p to produce, does not make 30p the true price.
a fair price should be sold to all farmers - british or third world (the crops produced by each will differ so its not about one or the other)
it seems stupid to import produce we can make ourselves for the sake of capitalist greed (its less environmentally friendly and it going to destroy the british farming business)
you dont owe anybody anything, except paying a fair price for good you consume whoever has produced it
Original post by citydeer
if youre worried about health then i dont think nuclear power is the answer, my point is in the 1980's it wasnt about health/renewable energy and i agree mining for coal is not a good way for energy (although neither is nuclear) you said yourself we have to import coal, yet we are sat on thousands of tonnes of coal we can no longer mine - however this isnt an argument about energy (and im not going to argue abt it anymore) its about supporting our british produce, something which should be done to avoid things such as now having to import coal
Please don't even try to compare the safety of nuclear versus coal power. Nuclear power is much, much, safer and cleaner than coal would ever be, after years of regulations and safety checks and industry standards. Nuclear power is arguably the safest way to generate electricity viably right now, unless fusion research makes great headway (don't bank on it). This doesn't even include the carbon dioxide emission aspect of burning coal.
The reality is that without loosening up the regulations and restrictions (which would probably put communities and workers at risk if we opened coal plants anyway) that prohibit coal mines from operating today, it'd probably be far cheaper just to buy our coal from other countries right now.
Original post by citydeer
a fair price should be sold to all farmers - british or third world (the crops produced by each will differ so its not about one or the other)
it seems stupid to import produce we can make ourselves for the sake of capitalist greed (its less environmentally friendly and it going to destroy the british farming business)
you dont owe anybody anything, except paying a fair price for good you consume whoever has produced it
it seems stupid to import produce we can make ourselves for the sake of capitalist greed (its less environmentally friendly and it going to destroy the british farming business)
you dont owe anybody anything, except paying a fair price for good you consume whoever has produced it
If I spend £5 making thousands of units of an item there is no demand for, I am not owed a price of £5+ for every unit of that I sell if nobody is willing to pay that price.
If the protectionist policies which drive up prices to the benefit of British farmers were to be removed, in all honesty, most would go bust over night and we'd probably sell the land for development. Stupid is buying British when African is just as good and half the price.
Original post by SmallTownGirl
Mostly land is not viable for all types of farming and even if it was a farmer would (most likely) have to spend millions on new farming equipment and may only have done one type of farming. If it's a long-term family run farm then the farmer has probably only worked on that one farm and has been doing it their whole life. A dairy farmer does not automatically know about arable farming or even different types of livestock farming.
Tenant farms are still often in a family for generations. A farmer and their family will live on the farm and the farmer may not have many qualifications if they grew up in a farming family and worked on the family farm after leaving school.
You're that selfish that you want to force families out of the house and community they've lived in for generations leaving them without a job rather than pay an extra 5p on a pint of milk?
Tenant farms are still often in a family for generations. A farmer and their family will live on the farm and the farmer may not have many qualifications if they grew up in a farming family and worked on the family farm after leaving school.
You're that selfish that you want to force families out of the house and community they've lived in for generations leaving them without a job rather than pay an extra 5p on a pint of milk?
Surely a farm should be treated exactly the same as any other business and if they do need the extra money or expertise to change what they produce they should just go to a bank or consultant rather than ignorantly refuse to change with the world around them.
I don't see any sentimental value of keeping dairy farmers or understand why farmers should be seen as owed a living in their career. I come from a family of coal miners but when they closed down all the mines everyone willingly found other (much better) jobs despite having no experience in anything else. I don't see why farming is any different.
I don't think any selfishness comes into this, I just think that it's morally wrong for a society to be paying more than the market for a product (including the many families struggling financially as it is) just to support a small minority, many of whom are well off and most of which could change to produce something else, hence cutting the supply of milk and fixing the entire issue themselves.
(edited 8 years ago)
I'd pay more for local milk, yes.
Original post by sr90
Why would I voluntarily pay more for anything? Why would anyone?
Because they have a conscience and want to do the right thing?
There's just too much supply of milk and the supermarkets are good at negotiating so they're able to get the price of milk down.
Either the demand for milk has to increase (unlikely) or the supply needs to shrink with some farmers going bust. Same as every other sector in the economy.
Why are farmers any different to everyone else in the economy?
Either the demand for milk has to increase (unlikely) or the supply needs to shrink with some farmers going bust. Same as every other sector in the economy.
Why are farmers any different to everyone else in the economy?
Original post by MilitantMindset
If I spend £5 making thousands of units of an item there is no demand for, I am not owed a price of £5+ for every unit of that I sell if nobody is willing to pay that price.
If the protectionist policies which drive up prices to the benefit of British farmers were to be removed, in all honesty, most would go bust over night and we'd probably sell the land for development. Stupid is buying British when African is just as good and half the price.
If the protectionist policies which drive up prices to the benefit of British farmers were to be removed, in all honesty, most would go bust over night and we'd probably sell the land for development. Stupid is buying British when African is just as good and half the price.
it depends what youre making, people are still going to want milk if you increase the price by 5p giving the farmers a fair price people wont suddenly revolt and stop buying milk, keeping a british farming industry alive for a slight price increase is not a bad thing, in the future we may NEED to provide for ourselves, we have needed to in the past (ww2) so the ability to do so is important (also its more environmentally friendly to use local produce)
Yes, ofc. I'm not entirely sure how much we currently pay for our milk bc I don't purchase it but I think its like just under £2. If this increased a little it would hardly make any difference to us however more than likely make a difference elsewhere and I suppose that's all that matters.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by The two eds
If it meant supporting BRITISH farmers/industry and resulted in better conditions for the animals, then absolutely! I'm struggling for money as it is but it would be worth it for just a little extra.
This is all I car about really. Don't care whether it is 'British' or not.
Original post by sr90
Why would I voluntarily pay more for anything? Why would anyone?
I'm not a utility maximizing robot? I pay more for free range eggs as apposed to their cheaper alternatives for example.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Abzz789
Hi all
So, most supermarkets now sell milk at 89p for 2 litres (or cheaper)
It costs the farmers at least 30p to produce a litre of milk, yet they are only being paid around 23p per litre for it.
Why is this?
Would you be willing to pay more? (my local corner shop charges £1.49 for 2l, no qualms about paying that at all)
Debate away!
So, most supermarkets now sell milk at 89p for 2 litres (or cheaper)
It costs the farmers at least 30p to produce a litre of milk, yet they are only being paid around 23p per litre for it.
Why is this?
Would you be willing to pay more? (my local corner shop charges £1.49 for 2l, no qualms about paying that at all)
Debate away!
The price for milk is probably about right for consumers, a lot of them wouldn't be able to pay higher prices due to cuts to benefits and low rises in wages and thus farmers would still lose out badly if prices rose as a lot less people would buy
I think the main issue here is the exploitation of farmers by big businesses, who are receiving incredible profits yet won't pay their supplies fairly.Why are farmers paid so little for products they have made?I believe that retailers should get very little of the money from a purchase, as they haven't produced it all they have done is sold it.
Original post by Dalek1099
I think the main issue here is the exploitation of farmers by big businesses, who are receiving incredible profits yet won't pay their supplies fairly.Why are farmers paid so little for products they have made?I believe that retailers should get very little of the money from a purchase, as they haven't produced it all they have done is sold it.
I think the main issue here is the exploitation of farmers by big businesses, who are receiving incredible profits yet won't pay their supplies fairly.Why are farmers paid so little for products they have made?I believe that retailers should get very little of the money from a purchase, as they haven't produced it all they have done is sold it.
The big four supermarkets lost billions last year.
Turnover's vanity, profit is sanity.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Do You Drink Milk As Is?
- About to start Civil Service, but just found out im Pregnant
- What kind of effects would it have if an underweight person has fizzy drink every day
- Housemate is probably an escort...
- Is plant milk better than cow milk?
- NHS trust says transgender milk just as good for babies as normal milk
- Milk before cereal or cereal before milk?
- Watson Glaser test - comparing answers!
- Chemistry
- Civil Service Apprenticeships.
- going insane
- Geography NEA
- Does anyone else feel that porridge makes them hungrier sooner?
- Food Safety and Supermarkets
- Make it More Milk-ey !!
- Do Our Advanced Higher Grades Affect Our Employability Chances?
- Help! I’m hungry
- Online Masters of Computer Science at University of Sunderland
- "Serious Mass" weight gain + Acne antibiotics
- Watson glasor test
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
