Some substantial reading

[malleefarmer]

Waded my way though it.

Not exactly correct term but article almost suggests law of diminishing returns with high input farmers, to me that doesn’t actually change with oR without climate change , they will always be high medium and low input farmer whatever the climate situation.

The issue of prices received was basically glossed over. If wheat had been 8 to 10 bucks a bushel ove last three years the paper probably wouldn’t have been written.

Consumers want cheap food be it flour meat veg whatever.

I myself have swung to a more medium input scenario and gone back to mixed farming but I do not demonise high input farmers at all but the article questioned that system not sure they have the right to criticise one farming system ove another that’s to simplistic an argument and will actually cause division amongst farmers.

That’s my take, there’s a mountain of grain in the world lesser counties producing way more than 10 years ago so go8ng foward prices are gonna be the main impediment at times. Sure drought helps prices but no one really wants that.

World wide problem. Machinery costs don’t get a mention either combination of all factors.

Was a bit tonight on tv about drought in Australia and how little support we get, when compared to French farmers was mind boggling govt programmes fo French and ps I’m not advocating that. As that a small part of grain surplus they just keep producing they know the6 will get propped up regardless of yields and o price and other issues

Cheers

[chuckChuck]

Farmers can't do much about world supply and demand and commodity prices unless they embrace supply management or some form of government intervention in the marketplace.

Neither fit under the banner of the 'free" market.

Many farmers seem content to let the "free" market decide the cost of their inputs and the price of their commodities and then rely on government support and subsidies.

The reality is most input companies and grain companies will charge what the market will bear. In many cases there is little real competition and large multinationals have the power to impose their will on farmers.

There are some options for farmers to reduce costs which can improve net incomes.

The biggest mistake has been to let the seed and chemical companies increase their control of the seed supply and the agronomy that goes with it.

Farmers need independent farmer driven research, development and delivery of seed and agronomy that is based on a system designs that maximize farmers returns and not the input sector.

Farmers also should have kept control of the grain handling and grain trading business as much as possible. The multinational grain companies have no loyalty to farmers or any particular country. Their main job is make sure their shareholders make money not farmers.

[bucket]

Farmers also should have kept control of the grain handling and grain trading business as much as possible. The multinational grain companies have no loyalty to farmers or any particular country. Their main job is make sure their shareholders make money not farmers.

Do not say that out loud to a WCWGA member.....you will be called a socialist instantly...like a string on the back of those dolls of the 70s and guess who is pulling the string....the companies that are essentially monopolies....wonder if the WCWGA realizes they are controlled/sponsored by monopolies????

[farmaholic]

Do not say that out loud to a WCWGA member.....you will be called a socialist instantly...like a string on the back of those dolls of the 70s

How is that different than being a puppet with Industry's hand up someone's ass making their lips move?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Farmers can't do much about world supply and demand and commodity prices unless they embrace supply management or some form of government intervention in the marketplace.

??? How does supply management in one country affect world supply and demand and commodity price? Unless you propose to unite farmers the world over to join in supply management, Canadian farmers alone, can only lose all export markets to cheaper alternatives by embracing supply management. We don't exist in a vacuum.

If the goal is to only produce as much as we consume within the country, and idle the vast majority of Canadian farmland, then SM is an excellent solution.

[bucket]

How is that different than being a puppet with Industry's hand up someone's ass making their lips move?

Its not....and I think the politicians are the same way....so industry controls the politicians and the only group conservatives take their advice from in regards to agriculture...


Pretty phucking sad....

[chuckChuck]

??? How does supply management in one country affect world supply and demand and commodity price? Unless you propose to unite farmers the world over to join in supply management, Canadian farmers alone, can only lose all export markets to cheaper alternatives by embracing supply management. We don't exist in a vacuum.

If the goal is to only produce as much as we consume within the country, and idle the vast majority of Canadian farmland, then SM is an excellent solution.

I didn't suggest supply management for grains. Because our capacity to produce grains far exceeds our domestic needs. But at one time, Canadian customers paid more for wheat for domestic use. But we gave that up with free trade deals.

Obviously we have been successful with dairy and poultry by managing supply and restricting imports. Most farmers in these sectors are happy with this system because they are making a predictable amount of profit.

And they don't think of themselves as socialists! But they are totally dependent on state intervention and protection.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I didn't suggest supply management for grains. Because our capacity to produce grains far exceeds our domestic needs. But at one time, Canadian customers paid more for wheat for domestic use. But we gave that up with free trade deals.

Obviously we have been successful with dairy and poultry by managing supply and restricting imports. Most farmers in these sectors are happy with this system because they are making a predictable amount of profit

Farmers can't do much about world supply and demand and commodity prices unless they embrace supply management or some form of government intervention in the marketplace

Then what sector are you suggesting will benefit from SM and government intervention?

[chuckChuck]

The government already subsidizes most of agriculture. Those subsidies could be targeted to small and medium sized farmers and expanded.

Dairy and poultry supply management systems are successful and shouldn't be traded away.

I am not sure what other sectors would benefit from supply management. Free trade deals restrict what we can do. But free trade looks to be dying and protectionism is taking over.

Alberta has used supply management to cut the supply of oil to increase prices in Alberta.

Potash producers and all kinds of industries use supply management to manage markets and prices.

Agriculture seems focused on maximizing production even if it means lower prices and reduced profits.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I am not sure what other sectors would benefit from supply management.

Then why did you propose that as your primary solution in your first thread?

Farmers can't do much about world supply and demand and commodity prices unless they embrace supply management or some form of government intervention in the marketplace