AHPP

Is the sprouting not a good thing? Or does the willow outcompete the other species too much?

What’s the double standard?

Cameron era I think. I don't know what the law was in the golden era of mining. The starting point is that you own your underground and you own your minerals. Perhaps miners had to buy mineral rights from landowners (or just buy the land with mineral rights) or perhaps there was similar thing to the undercut fracking law where miners were statutorily absolved from what would otherwise be a trespass. I imagine it was the former.

It's the starting point. Often later modified. The up limit is better known. I don't know whether down is limited. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_est_solum,_eius_est_usque_ad_coelum_et_ad_inferos The biggest scandal with the new laws about fracking btw isn't the stuff Dave Angel might complain about, rather that frackers can now legally trespass into your underground.

The law does.

True market value is observed in the absence of constraints. The current starting point in the UK is that you can't build anything. That's a constraint. Planning permission is currently a positively granted right to do something that you otherwise can't do. It's the exception, not the rule. In your example of a forest, the true market value would be found where TPOs don't exist on either your forest or other people's forests. That's your starting point. Adding a TPO to your forest and not other people's will drive your forest value down. Adding TPOs to other people's forests will drive your forest value up. I'd normally love to evangelise about the benefits of various (and all) freedoms but to be honest I'm fairly sick of this thread. Suffice to say that if I ruled the world I wouldn't restrict building at all. Who am I to tell people what to do with their property?

J, If you take grant funding you'll be a hypocrite or as bad as all the other people who think they know what's best for people other than themselves. Scrap the bloody lot, subsidies and land use restrictions, and what works will become apparent very quickly.

Land cost is very much artificially inflated by planning laws. I live in a very normal house on a fortieth of an acre. The land value is, pro rata, £1.8 million per acre. Then subtract the reinstatement value of my house, £100,000. Planning permission has artificially increased the pro rata value of my land by £1.7 million per acre. Undeveloped land around here is £4,000-£10,000 per acre. The value is roughly two hundred times greater because of planning laws. NB I'm in a very cheap area. In other areas, my land value could be multiples larger, probably up to £15 million per acre pro rata. Then you're looking at planning laws increasing the value of land by about two thousand times. Monetary policy plays a huge part. People invest in land (and other assets) because money isn't worth anything. The great thing about individualist politics is that no one person needs to know how to solve these kind of problems. They (people who might otherwise seek power) just back off and natural order is found. If problems arise, they're either brought on you by yourself, so your problem, or by an aggressor, who you can sue etc. At the moment, people are caused problems directly and indirectly (unintended consequences etc) by people they can't sue, principally the state.

Building land is artificially inflated at the moment.

There are some pathetic, jealous, mean-spirited cunts on this thread. You haven't got the guts or intellect to imagine being free of the nonsense planning laws. You're getting fucked by them so you want everybody else to get fucked by them. J wants to live well and he's prepared to work for it. Why shouldn't he? Who the fuck are you to say? I'm aware of pragmatism and of the apparent futility of trying to change something that's difficult to change but I take issue with people who are so small that they don't even dream of things being better and who try and drag other people down. You deserve serfdom.

You're within your rights by now to tell people to fuck off for saying that.

How about getting some cows?

I was being sarcastic. It clearly didn’t scribe well. My apologies. My point was that businesses of any size are at the mercy of market forces. People won’t starve. They’ll find someone to sell them food that they want at a price they can afford. God bless capitalism and all who sail in her. More generally, you said in another post that big business can be a problem like big government. I agree to an extent but participation is voluntary in one and not the other. An absolutely critical difference.

Then everybody will starve and Tesco won’t have anyone to sell to.

I’ve no idea. 2p was just the first number that came into my head. It doesn’t matter. What does matter is that one system pays politicians and civil servants to take and give. The other system doesn’t. The latter system can therefore provide the same thing for less because there’s no politicans’ cut.

I didn’t bother describing every step of the delivery chain but it would make no difference anyway. Just assume that 2p of the 20p carrot cost is transport and distributor and retail margins or whatever.

And I was being bloody kind with the 5p.

Current system: Government taxes consumer 10p for carrot subsidy and 5p to administrate the collection of tax and distribution of subsidy. Government gives the 10p subsidy to a farmer. Farmer sells a carrot to consumer for 10p. Consumer gets a carrot for 25p. Farmer gets 20p for a carrot. Government gets 5p. Free market: Tax a consumer nothing. Farmer sells a carrot to a consumer for 20p. Farmer gets the same 20p. Consumer has the same carrot for 5p less. Government not necessary.

So not a 1 or 1.5 tonne payload then...

That yellow one with crane and hook can’t possibly be under 3000kg with a chip bin on?

That is absolutely not what he said and you know it. You've done similar talking to me on this thread too.

I'd be delighted.

That sounds excellent. Keep us posted.

IF that happened, without people paying the extremely high taxes that pay the subsidies (and the cost of administering collecting the taxes and divvying them out), people could easily pay double.

See for yourself with this helpful website Kevin Johnson of this parish recently posted. Explore European Common Agricultural Policy farm subsidy payments | FarmSubsidy.org FARMSUBSIDY.ORG FarmSubsidy shows who gets subsidies under the European Common Agricultural Policy