Handed down on a plate.

[Dan Curtis]

It's not really a case of being paid not to produce, unless you're talking about set side and field margins?Which is a whole different kettle of fish.

 

Sure a helping hand from the government would be delightful, but that wouldn't be business, thats verging on a benefits culture. I for one wouldn't want to live in the government's pocket.

[skyhuck]

It's not really a case of being paid not to produce, unless you're talking about set side and field margins?Which is a whole different kettle of fish.

 

Sure a helping hand from the government would be delightful, but that wouldn't be business, thats verging on a benefits culture. I for one wouldn't want to live in the government's pocket.

 

But thats what farm subsidies are, surely???

[Andy Collins]

Does it really matter that much how you started out, whether you were given a helping hand, given yardage in your daddys farm, or a hand out from Great Grand mama? There always seems to be resentment that somebody else is getting something youre not. So what? If its a wise investment, you certainly wouldnt pour money into tree work, but something that actually makes a profit occasionally. What is so unnatural about a father wishing to help his son, thats a purely natural progression, survival of the species, or your genes being helped along to succeed.

I had a warehouse job for many years when my kids were young, enough to live on, but nothing left over to save for the future. i got made redundant, and the government gave us our retraining, and support to get going. Some frittered this opportunity away, I took full advantage of it. Is that wrong? I am no burden on the state, I can hold my head up and be proud of myself, and have been in the position to help my kids on their way. Thats nothing to be ashamed of. Each to their own, live life your own way, just dont tread on others in your ambitions.

[Dan Curtis]

But thats what farm subsidies are, surely???

 

Not really, if farming was the booming business it's made our to be, there would be no need for subsidies. The problem lies in the supermarkets, as has been said, and the competition on pricing against imported food. Do you buy british or the cheapest when you go shopping?

[skyhuck]

I don't go shopping.

[Dan Curtis]

Ok, unless you're self sufficient, whoever does your grocery shopping, same question?

[swinny]

This thread wants locking and throwing away

[skyhuck]

My Mrs buys most of our meat from the local butcher, he gets most of his meat from the fields I can see from my house. But our other stuff is mostly from the supper market.

 

I don't see why the fact that you think farmers need help makes it OK??

 

IME if you give people the option of help they will take it, I personally think it would be better if farmers were left to survive or fail just like all other industries.

 

It seems to me that if what you say is true, its the supermarkets that are being indirectly subsidised and I don't think they should be.

[Mick Stockbridge]

This thread wants locking and throwing away

 

No one is twisting yer arm to look or reply even.

[Peter]

It seems to me that if what you say is true, its the supermarkets that are being indirectly subsidised and I don't think they should be.

 

That is the root of the problem, food should be at least twice the price at retail, and farmers should get a much bigger proportion of the retail price. That way we wouldnt need a farming subsidy system.

 

How does anyone look at tesco selling 3 chickens for £5 and not smell a rat? In real terms food has never been cheaper, in the 1950s familys spent about 40% of household income on food, today the figure is nearer 10%. IMO the primary reason for this is supermarkets driving down prices from producers. (not just farmers btw)