guaranteed pricing for fruit and vegetable producers

cremeegg

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,018
If subsidies were removed, the likes of him would hoover up half the country's agricultural land at knockdown values and we'd be halfway to a national food production oligopoly
If subsidies were removed no doubt agricultural land would be transferred from less efficient producers to more efficient producers.

This would be a far better utilization of a major national resource. Resulting in cheaper food and freeing up of Labour for more productive purposes. A win win.

I don’t doubt for a moment Mr. G that you understsnd this as well or better than I.

The possibility of an oligopoly arising certainly exists but fear of possible future problems which may arise is no reason not to address current problems which actually exist.
 

joe sod

Frequent Poster
Messages
716
We should remove all price supports and trade openly with developing countries who could produce most of our food for us. That would cause a consolidation in the agricultural sector which would eventually lead to far fewer but much larger producers. Globally we'd reduce real poverty and lift the incomes of millions of families. Our current model (the CAP) is immoral and economically nonsensical.

As for water shortages for producers; invest in contingency plans and stop expecting the general public to prop up your business. Who do you think you are, a farmer? Oh, yea, sorry; scrounge away.
That was the situation that existed pre world war 2, there was free trade in food , europe imported much of its food from the americas, australia and new zealand. When this trade was halted by the war europe starved, that was the whole rationale for the CAP. The CAP is a bad system by the way but that is more to do with the politics of the EU than anything else , reform happens as in many other areas at snails pace.
As for depending on the developing world which has enough mouths of its own to feed and is suffering much more than europe from droughts and undependable rainfall. There is not enough arable land in the world to feed the growing global population and that is not taking into account the problem of climate change. Europe and America are in the temperate zone, therefore it is in the best area to grow food, thats why when you look at the globe they are coloured green whereas africa is largely yellow. Many african countries are also importers of food so are hardly in a position to supply europe.
 

odyssey06

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,611
As for depending on the developing world which has enough mouths of its own to feed and is suffering much more than europe from droughts and undependable rainfall. There is not enough arable land in the world to feed the growing global population and that is not taking into account the problem of climate change. Europe and America are in the temperate zone, therefore it is in the best area to grow food, thats why when you look at the globe they are coloured green whereas africa is largely yellow. Many african countries are also importers of food so are hardly in a position to supply europe.
http://www.dpa-international.com/topic/eu-food-exports-hinder-african-agricultural-development-170503-99-298260

Africa can't compete with EU subsidies. The entire situation is distorted by them.
 

llgon

Frequent Poster
Messages
396
Yes, and the European farmers don't want to compete with the farmers of the developing world on a equitable basis, despite Joe's assertions that there would be no competition.

Joe, I don't think you answered my questions at the start of the thread:

Is it the case that the price of this fruit and veg is expected to rise this year, due to lower production, thus reducing loss to the growers? If a guaranteed price had been agreed would it not be to the disadvantage of growers?
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
If subsidies were removed no doubt agricultural land would be transferred from less efficient producers to more efficient producers.

This would be a far better utilization of a major national resource. Resulting in cheaper food and freeing up of Labour for more productive purposes. A win win.
Oligopolies rarely if ever result in cheaper prices.

I used the example of Larry Goodman for a reason. His track record in the meat processing trade, a classic oligopoly, is worth looking at very very closely.

And I'm picking my words extremely carefully here.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
That was the situation that existed pre world war 2, there was free trade in food , europe imported much of its food from the americas, australia and new zealand. When this trade was halted by the war europe starved, that was the whole rationale for the CAP. The CAP is a bad system by the way but that is more to do with the politics of the EU than anything else , reform happens as in many other areas at snails pace.
The whole self reliant on food thing is nonsense, especially for Ireland. If global trade broke down how would we get the fuel for our farm machinery? Where would we get our tractors? Where would be get the tyres and parts for our trucks to deliver the food? Where would we get the fertiliser and the feed and the seed and the medicines and the plastic for our packaging? We’d have plenty of beef and Dairymaster could keep making the milking parlours, that is until they ran out of metal and plastic and PCB’s and wire etc. We live in a globalised just in time world. Self sufficiency, for Ireland or the EU, is a myth.


As for depending on the developing world which has enough mouths of its own to feed and is suffering much more than europe from droughts and undependable rainfall. There is not enough arable land in the world to feed the growing global population and that is not taking into account the problem of climate change. Europe and America are in the temperate zone, therefore it is in the best area to grow food, thats why when you look at the globe they are coloured green whereas africa is largely yellow. Many african countries are also importers of food so are hardly in a position to supply europe.
Nonsense. The land around Lake Victoria is the best in the world. Rwanda is the size of Leinster, has 8 million people, and produces more than enough food. Most of Europe and much of North America are in the Northern Temperate Zone. You do know that there’s a Southern Temperate Zone as well, right?
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
http://www.dpa-international.com/topic/eu-food-exports-hinder-african-agricultural-development-170503-99-298260

Africa can't compete with EU subsidies. The entire situation is distorted by them.
Yep, we dump our produce at below cost prices, thus stymying the development of their agricultural industry, and then make ourselves feel good by giving them charity which is a tiny fraction of the subsidies we give to our farmers. The CAP is morally wrong. We kill people to maintain the myth of self sufficiency.
 

joe sod

Frequent Poster
Messages
716
The whole self reliant on food thing is nonsense, especially for Ireland. If global trade broke down how would we get the fuel for our farm machinery? Where would we get our tractors? Where would be get the tyres and parts for our trucks to deliver the food? Where would we get the fertiliser and the feed and the seed and the medicines and the plastic for our packaging? We’d have plenty of beef and Dairymaster could keep making the milking parlours, that is until they ran out of metal and plastic and PCB’s and wire etc. We live in a globalised just in time world. Self sufficiency, for Ireland or the EU, is a myth.
Its not a nonsense, why was it one of the central corner stones in the formation of the EEC, because in the 1950s the memory of the war years and food shortages and rationing were very fresh. The architects of the european community rightly observed that a reliable and self sufficient source of food was the basis of economic development. We have grown up in an era where we take the supply of food for granted, there has never been shortages, the supermarkets are always full (remember the panic over bread during the snow). Yes it is true that a disruption of trade would hit supplies of other vital products, however a trade war or worse between european countries is highly unlikely, and europe supplies most of those essential products anyway. It is far more likely that wars and disruptions will happen in developing countries , Rwanda was a perfect example of this 20 years ago

Nonsense. The land around Lake Victoria is the best in the world. Rwanda is the size of Leinster, has 8 million people, and produces more than enough food. Most of Europe and much of North America are in the Northern Temperate Zone. You do know that there’s a Southern Temperate Zone as well, right?
Yes of course I know about the southern temperate zone, unfortunately it is not as significant as the nothern one as relatively small amount of land is situated within it compared to the north, it only contains southern africa, southern part of south america, mainly brazil and argentina and new zealand, australia is not really in it either, (thats why the original discoverers of australia,the dutch, were not overly excited by it). Therefore all of the good temperate land in europe is still essential for food production
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
why was it one of the central corner stones in the formation of the EEC, because in the 1950s the memory of the war years and food shortages and rationing were very fresh
That was nearly 70 years ago. The shortages weren’t caused by lack of production capacity, it was caused by war. Therefore the EEC/EU served the function of not letting people within it starve by preventing war through open trade, not by subsidising farmers.


The architects of the european community rightly observed that a reliable and self sufficient source of food was the basis of economic development.
Plenty of countries have a reliable and self sufficient source of food but don’t have economic development. A functioning and competent public sector, trade, minimal corruption, the rule of law, property rights and education are all required for economic development.


We have grown up in an era where we take the supply of food for granted, there has never been shortages, the supermarkets are always full (remember the panic over bread during the snow).
Yes, but the cost to others is horrific.


Yes it is true that a disruption of trade would hit supplies of other vital products, however a trade war or worse between european countries is highly unlikely, and europe supplies most of those essential products anyway. It is far more likely that wars and disruptions will happen in developing countries , Rwanda was a perfect example of this 20 years ago
Rwanda, yes, due to instability, tribalism (think Northern Ireland) outside interference by European powers and general regional instability due to the legacy of colonialism and the Cold War. Bugger all to do with food production. If Europe goes to war with itself again people will starve again.


Yes of course I know about the southern temperate zone, unfortunately it is not as significant as the nothern one as relatively small amount of land is situated within it compared to the north, it only contains southern africa, southern part of south america, mainly brazil and argentina and new zealand, australia is not really in it either, (thats why the original discoverers of australia,the dutch, were not overly excited by it). Therefore all of the good temperate land in europe is still essential for food production
We in the EU only produce about one third of the food we are capable of producing. That is due to environmental regulations and the inefficient structures within the agricultural industry. Instead we outsource that environmental damage to other countries and import what they produce, thus adding carbon miles to the environmental damage we already caused. We then keep prices low by giving massive welfare payments to our farmers.



There is no food security argument for the CAP.

There is no environmental argument for the CAP.

There is no moral or ethical argument for the CAP.

It is simply a political tool to keep farmers happy but in doing so we cause unimaginable suffering.
 

joe sod

Frequent Poster
Messages
716
We in the EU only produce about one third of the food we are capable of producing. That is due to environmental regulations and the inefficient structures within the agricultural industry.
We produce only a third !! where did you get that statistic from, almost all of the arable land in europe is in full production, so where is the two thirds produce thats not being produced going to come from. I agree that we produce less than we could because of environmental considerations but hardly by 2/3 . Surely that is a good thing that the food produced is of high standards.

Instead we outsource that environmental damage to other countries and import what they produce, thus adding carbon miles to the environmental damage we already caused. We then keep prices low by giving massive welfare payments to our farmers.
I thought you were advocating importing our food from third countries, now you are arguing against yourself. What food are you talking about that europe outsources the production of because it is too dirty to produce here. I thought outsourcing dirty production was the preserve of heavy industry and electronics where the dirty part of the production happens in third countries. You cant really tar the food industry with that one.

I think you have taken my point about the small land area encompassed in the southern temperate zone. The biggest land area that is much underused is in the northern zone and is actually Russia, not Europe.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
We produce only a third !! where did you get that statistic from, almost all of the arable land in europe is in full production, so where is the two thirds produce thats not being produced going to come from. I agree that we produce less than we could because of environmental considerations but hardly by 2/3 . Surely that is a good thing that the food produced is of high standards.
It was a former employee of the world bank talking on Pat Kenny on Newstalk a while ago.

I thought you were advocating importing our food from third countries, now you are arguing against yourself. What food are you talking about that europe outsources the production of because it is too dirty to produce here.
We import beef into the EU and then slap ourselves on the back that we've got greenhouse gas emissions down when in reality we have just outsourced the pollution. We in Ireland know all about how much environmental damage beef production causes; it's the main source of our industrial pollution.

I thought outsourcing dirty production was the preserve of heavy industry and electronics where the dirty part of the production happens in third countries. You cant really tar the food industry with that one.
The dirty part of electronics production is the mining that takes place to produce the elements used in them. That happens in places like central Africa and Australia. Energy production and farming are the big polluters.

I think you have taken my point about the small land area encompassed in the southern temperate zone. The biggest land area that is much underused is in the northern zone and is actually Russia, not Europe.
I agree. War the Ukraine (the breadbasket of the Soviet Union) has disrupted production. If we traded fairly with former Soviet Republics they'd have the resources to invest in the infrastructure to further increase production.
The EU can make or break agriculture in poorer countries. Just look at the recent deal with Georgia (the country that invented wine) around Hazelnut production.
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
We in Ireland know all about how much environmental damage beef production causes; it's the main source of our industrial pollution.
Really??? I find this hard to believe. Not even mentioned here in this newspaper report on industrial pollution. https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/industrial-pollution-down-since-2013-high-336494.html I've never heard of any industrial pollution issues with beef processors like Kepak in Clonee nor Liffey Meats in Ballyjamesduff for example.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
Really??? I find this hard to believe. Not even mentioned here in this newspaper report on industrial pollution. https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/industrial-pollution-down-since-2013-high-336494.html I've never heard of any industrial pollution issues with beef processors like Kepak in Clonee nor Liffey Meats in Ballyjamesduff for example.
Apologies, I was talking in the context of greenhouse gas emissions.
Just because it doesn't smell bad or kill fish in a river that doesn't mean it's not pollution.
The Eu's solution is to import beef from South America, adding carbon miles to the existing greenhouse gas emissions and encouraging deforestation etc.
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
Apologies, I was talking in the context of greenhouse gas emissions.
I understand your confusion, the conflation of the two is utterly endemic and obscures all such discussions like a dark cloud, if you'll pardon the pun.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
I understand your confusion, the conflation of the two is utterly endemic and obscures all such discussions like a dark cloud, if you'll pardon the pun.
I wasn't confused. I was just unclear in contextualising what I said.
Pollution from farming into our waterways is the main source of pollution in those waterways.
The notion that farming is a clean industry is nonsense.
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
Pollution from farming into our waterways is the main source of pollution in those waterways.
That's a totally different argument though from this sweeping and totally incorrect statement which you made earlier.

We in Ireland know all about how much environmental damage beef production causes; it's the main source of our industrial pollution.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
That's a totally different argument though from this sweeping and totally incorrect statement which you made earlier.
It is a different point alright.
The statement I made earlier was about industrial greenhouse gas pollution. It it factually correct. My error was in not being clear that I was talking about greenhouse gases.
Agriculture is our biggest polluter. Arrabawn Co-Op, Arrow Group, Carbery Food Ingredients and Dairygold Co-op have all been "named and shamed" by the EPA.
Agriculture accounts for one third of our total greenhouse gas emissions from beef production and the whole sector, and particularly beef, is expanding rapidly. The fines for not meeting our targets could be as high as €600 million by 2020 but I suppose it's just another subsidy for the farmers.
We also have water pollution from fertilizer and effluent run off etc.
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
Again you're continually mixing and conflating so-called greenhouse gas emissions with actual pollution. Reasoned and informed debate is impossible as long as this persists.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
9,066
So you don't think that greenhouse gas emissions are a form of pollution?! Sweet Jesus.
 

T McGibney

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,555
So you don't think that greenhouse gas emissions are a form of pollution?!
No I don't. Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring and naturally prevalent gas that is essential for the existence of life.

And please don't swear. For starters, it's against AAM posting guidelines.
 
Top