the journal this week

He might be busier than ever but is he making the same income he was??
Or maybe if he was leasing a lot he could be as far on now.
 
There is no need for subsidies! The meat and milk is selling for twice what we get in the shops, we need to cut out some of those who profit from it.
It's not the armchair farmer that's the problem it's the armchair investor.
 
Farmerbigballs said:
The arm chair farmer that isn’t fully utilizing his land and running a topper once or twice a year is doing no other farmer any harm however the guy that retaining entitlements while leasing land to a active farmer (who will be lucky to make the rent on it) should not qualify.
Click to expand...

There's another class of armchair farmer in these parts and in a lot of other parts. Lads who built up big payments through slaughter payments. There's lads around here who built up massive payments like this on small acres and who have shifted down a gear or three in recent years just keeping enough stock to qualify for payments. I don't believe that lads should be getting paid on what they were doing 15 to 20 years ago. It should be the here and now that they get paid on and it should be a level playing field for everyone.
 
i think payments should be redistributed to the sections that built up those payments in the first place eg if 40% of the pot is to compensate beef farmers for the extra expenses in beef production well then 40% of the pot should be given to beef farmers , the same with tillage , sheep and dairy whatever % they pulled in to the country that sector should be allowed to use that money, its ridiculous that a farmer with 300 dairy cows should be getting compensated for growing 300 acres of corn when he doesn,t sow a grain now or the same with a lad getting paid for sucklers when he has left that sector
 
THERE SHOULD BE NO SUBSIDIES! The product is selling and at a high price. We need to produce less, for less and make a higher margin.
Group together, process and sell it under a farmer owned entity that does not make profit. Maximising our income.
If you want to be part of the group you must have grain grown from within the republic of Ireland, either your own home grown or purchased from a grain grower. This will lessen our overall production.
This would be for all livestock farmers not just beef, but dairy, lamb and poultry. If it's sold in our shop it's food is grown in ireland.
Compete in the actual selling of the product, we only need be the same price, and seeing as we've no profit to make for either the shop or the processing this should be easy.
 
That's all fine if we sell everything here but could we survive selling to export markets without subsidies, as a food exporting economy we would be in dire straits.
 
jcb411abuser said:
THERE SHOULD BE NO SUBSIDIES! The product is selling and at a high price. We need to produce less, for less and make a higher margin.
Group together, process and sell it under a farmer owned entity that does not make profit. Maximising our income.
If you want to be part of the group you must have grain grown from within the republic of Ireland, either your own home grown or purchased from a grain grower. This will lessen our overall production.
This would be for all livestock farmers not just beef, but dairy, lamb and poultry. If it's sold in our shop it's food is grown in ireland.
Compete in the actual selling of the product, we only need be the same price, and seeing as we've no profit to make for either the shop or the processing this should be easy.
Click to expand...
so you reckon lads will be falling over themselves to give money to beet ireland , you see whats happening to kerrygold in the US farmers competing against each other in the top end of the market
 
jcb411abuser said:
THERE SHOULD BE NO SUBSIDIES! The product is selling and at a high price. We need to produce less, for less and make a higher margin.
Group together, process and sell it under a farmer owned entity that does not make profit. Maximising our income.
If you want to be part of the group you must have grain grown from within the republic of Ireland, either your own home grown or purchased from a grain grower. This will lessen our overall production.
This would be for all livestock farmers not just beef, but dairy, lamb and poultry. If it's sold in our shop it's food is grown in ireland.
Compete in the actual selling of the product, we only need be the same price, and seeing as we've no profit to make for either the shop or the processing this should be easy.
Click to expand...
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/revealed-factory-feedlot-contribution-to-irish-beef-kill/
This kind of went under the radar as it came out just before Christmas. 18% of the total kill so far this year coming from factory controlled farms. That is more than enough for market manipulation to occur. What you are saying is correct, I would be all for abolishing all subsidies but it will only work in a free market, something we are very far away from. The big businesses are able to get away with things we would be prevented from doing.
 
WestCorkBoy said:
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/revealed-factory-feedlot-contribution-to-irish-beef-kill/

Just goes to show the shocking poor standard of reporting on agriland!! You can be a "feedlot" and have zero arrangement with the factory, its basically just saying you must go direct to slaughter no farm to farm sales. It is purely a TB based designation where you can buy in if you have a reactor but you don't get compensation.
Click to expand...
Was discussed in the factory prices thread... My thoughts are made clear there.... Utter bull, nothing to do with commercial arrangements the dept would have no knowledge of these so how the hell would they end up in dept statistics.
 
6600 said:
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/revealed-factory-feedlot-contribution-to-irish-beef-kill/
This kind of went under the radar as it came out just before Christmas. 18% of the total kill so far this year coming from factory controlled farms. That is more than enough for market manipulation to occur. What you are saying is correct, I would be all for abolishing all subsidies but it will only work in a free market, something we are very far away from. The big businesses are able to get away with things we would be prevented from doing.
Click to expand...
Sorry my previous reply was to this post by @6600
 
humungus said:
so you reckon lads will be falling over themselves to give money to beet ireland , you see whats happening to kerrygold in the US farmers competing against each other in the top end of the market
Click to expand...
This isn't the same thing at all. Beet ireland will have to compete to get it's product on the shelf, Kerrygold compete for shelf space. I'm talking about providing our own shelf space and not competing in production but in selling the product to consumers.
And what I'm talking about could help beet ireland as they could use the same outlet for their product.
 
WestCorkBoy said:
Was discussed in the factory prices thread... My thoughts are made clear there.... Utter bull, nothing to do with commercial arrangements the dept would have no knowledge of these so how the hell would they end up in dept statistics.
Click to expand...
I think the basis of their figures is that that percentage of the national kill came from DAFM approved TB feedlots, 338 of them. By definition most of these are factory owned and controlled. I have my own suspicions that some large finishers are lets say finishing someone else's cattle on their farms. I find the figures in the article compelling as 18% of the national herd didn't come down with TB in the year. I will read through the other forum to see the comments there.
 
6600 said:
I think the basis of their figures is that that percentage of the national kill came from DAFM approved TB feedlots, 338 of them. By definition most of these are factory owned and controlled. I have my own suspicions that some large finishers are lets say finishing someone else's cattle on their farms. I find the figures in the article compelling as 18% of the national herd didn't come down with TB in the year. I will read through the other forum to see the comments there.
Click to expand...
Ya I read the comments on the factory prices forum. I get what you are saying but still 18% from 338 farms is a fair number. The factories would have a fair say on those farms when those cattle were slaughtered too. Fair to say they are factory controlled?
 
Your assertion that "by definition most of these are factory owned and controlled" is based on what? Large finishers turning short keep cattle use the structure to allow them to buy if they have an animal kill with leisons and to avoid hassle with. Animals out of test, they don't have to be restricted with TB to be a registered feedlot. These finishers are turning big numbers every 100 days its the business model hence the large kill, yes some have agreed prices some are finishing factory cattle, but by no means all and there is zero basis to say that is the case. It is sensationalist and designed to get a reaction but has nothing to do with facts or truth its misrepresenting statistics in way that is either dishonest or incompetent.
 
6600 said:
Ya I read the comments on the factory prices forum. I get what you are saying but still 18% from 338 farms is a fair number. The factories would have a fair say on those farms when those cattle were slaughtered too. Fair to say they are factory controlled?
Click to expand...

Sorry hadn't seen this before I sent last reply.
 
6600 said:
Ya I read the comments on the factory prices forum. I get what you are saying but still 18% from 338 farms is a fair number. The factories would have a fair say on those farms when those cattle were slaughtered too. Fair to say they are factory controlled?
Click to expand...
Why would they have any more say than on any other farm? I don't think its fair to say factory controlled, maybe in a small number of cases yes, but if they are a TB feedlot or not has no bearing on this, that's my issue. Would I like to know how much control they have yes but tb feedlots are nothing to do with it.
 
WestCorkBoy said:
Why would they have any more say than on any other farm? I don't think its fair to say factory controlled, maybe in a small number of cases yes, but if they are a TB feedlot or not has no bearing on this, that's my issue. Would I like to know how much control they have yes but tb feedlots are nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
I think they used that statistic as it's the nearest they could get to the info they were looking for.
  • all the factory owned and controlled farms would be in those 338 farms, yes? Maybe some are not but so what? What the figures say doesn't change.
  • There would be a lot of factory agents in that number too. Correct to say they're factory controlled?
  • 338 is a tiny % of the total suppliers. The average number each slaughter is 934 a year, not your typical farm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top