Member Info for joebop

"If that is the case, then some produce would have been wasted in the field, saving it from being wasted in the supermarkets and in homes instead."

I don't know where to begin with that statement. If they're wasted in the shops, at least the farmer has got paid. Food rotting in a field is the worst possible scenario. Economically and environmentally.

What technology are you talking about?

Let's go back to the fruit picking/pruning scenario. Nothing beats a human hand for this task. Nothing. There is not a robot in the world that currently comes within an asses roar of matching this, not even close. It's years and years away.

Now, think of the costs associated with this robot when it does arrive. Going to be used about 2 months out of the whole year during harvest. Gathers dust the remainder of the time.

Humans do a cheaper, faster and better job.

There is some "tech" there that reduces time for calving and some other tasks. Bigger better tractors for tillage. Drones for targeted fertiliser application etc. These aren't the labour solutions that you seem to think they are.

Yes. Dig for Britain. Because Londoners and other city dwellers have all the land they need to grow their own.

Such a simple solution.

You didn't have enough farm workers to pick last summer's crop.

Where are they going to come from? You're talking about doubling production almost, in a capital intensive industry, (them large glasshouses aren't cheap) with no workers.

People like their Costa rica pineapples, Egyptian grapes, Mexican avocados, Californian pistachios.

They're not going to switch to home produced crappy apples and shitberries willingly overnight.

If by going under, you mean retiring and dying, you're absolutely right.

The eu has kept more small farms in business than would be there without their help.

If food standards put bad farmers out of business, I'm not going to cry over that.

There is more to this than numbers as I said earlier. Social and environmental benefits etc.

All lost on you unfortunately.

Did u ask what % of his income came from cap payments?

Take away the payments, you take all the small marginal farmers out of production. They don't produce much alone, but together constitute a large % of the overall production.

Cut off supply. Price increases. Simple.

Sorry Bruce, you've got that one a bit backwards I think.

The dairy farmers are doing quite well, it's the beef farmers that are struggling more so due to the expansion of the dairy herd since quotas were abolished.

In Ireland recently farmers got about 33c/l milk. Tesco/German branded milk is 75c/l. Branded milk is around 125c/l.

Both Tesco and the brands pay the farmer the same price.

Again following your logic, nobody would buy anything from anybody anymore. Reason being, this manufacturer/farmer/publican is already wealthy, he doesn't need any more money.

Economy grinds to a standstill.

Boomer, this is Civilisation 101.

People need a safe, secure supply of food.

No food - no civilisation.

It's one of the first building blocks of any society. You then have well fuelled workers for your factories, construction, services, war efforts etc.

Same principles apply today as did a thousand years ago.

You're the idiot in this instance boomer.

I distinctly said its not perfect. IT'S NOT PERFECT.

The original intent, as I outlined, was sound.

Dreadful cap?

Depends who you ask really. I quite like the fact that I don't pay £5 for a pint of milk.

More to it than simple numbers anyway. Security of food supply. Quite a nice idea. Keeping people employed in rural areas. Quite a nice idea. Keeping the countryside maintained. Quite a nice idea. Animal health standards. Quite a nice idea.

Is it perfect? No. Bet we're a heck of a lot better off than if we never had it.

The world has watched UK parliament run around like headless chickens the last few years, while signing up to Agreements and then Reneging on them straight away.

How in the world, under this backdrop, do you reckon you will get 50+ FTA'S composed, deliberated and signed off within the next few years to avoid disruption.

Where is the manpower to simultaneously draw up and discuss these deals.

There is a bit more to these than a one page letter of intent.

So the customs union protects inefficient producers...

By that logic UK producers also fall into that category. You're assuming that all UK goods are superb, fairly priced and the whole rest of the worldwide will immediately want to purchase them.

Hello?

That couldn't possibly be true booboo.

I watched Andrew bell in numerous interviews saying that they were just weeks away from giving profit and production forecasts....and that was months ago.....before they moved to this new more profitable patch too.

Sure isn't it met coal they sell. Cough cough. The super duper specialist coal that fetches a premium. Cough cough.

After the shenanigans of transferring to pension account.

Clutching at straws with that one. Who's going to download that going on holidays.

Sounds good as a PR fluff piece. Reality is a different thing.

Rsi means f all on exploration stocks.

Metallurgical coal, MrMagic.

Oh.......wait a minute now....this "met coal" they're always banging on about....hmmmm.

It's a junket. **** up with old colleagues.

Sniffing around, as you put it, is a handy excuse.

"If you want true disaster open a quarry."

About 5000 years too late with that warning! Quarrying is essential for human life. Oil extraction is for comfort.

Never seen a quarry do as much damage as the gulf of Mexico oil spill mind you.

Catalysts?

Sandfire put a shot across the bow. Whether that is a early once off offer, draws out other bidders, or pushes mod on independently, it's a fairly big catalyst dude.

If you bought in Apr 16, (presumably on a spike?) Are asking for catalysts for sp movement, and want to move on now, I think you need to seriously reassess your strategy.

Seriously.