Ozzy Scott
Well-Known Member
At least we would be competing during a low cost periodThen they will just beat grass finishers with the same brush.
At least we would be competing during a low cost periodThen they will just beat grass finishers with the same brush.
Great to see a lift, not sure it's available down here, but that wouldn't be unusual. Were quoting for this week at 3.70.Steers €3.80 for this day week is what I was quoted today.
€3.75 was paid in local factory this morning. I was there with a friend to drop off 3 and purchasing man gave me that price for next week. Its a long way off where it needs to be. Possible that it will rise some more in march. April could bring a bump. They are already talking that the temporary trade agreement with the UK comes to an end on April 1st. You can be sure that it will be used as an excuse to drop prices yet several agri media outlets published articles in the last week claiming that beef will see significant price rises in the coming weeks due to low numbers and a significant increase in beef consumption among the British public.Great to see a lift, not sure it's available down here, but that wouldn't be unusual. Were quoting for this week at 3.70.
No surprise from the latest get together.. https://www.agriland.ie/farming-new...g-ends-in-frustration-for-farm-organisations/
Probably good expenses out of it if its facilitated by the governmentDont know why anyone persists with it.
More money that will end up in the processors pocket despite being given to the farmer.A waste of money, at this point all beef processors, are also involved in finishing beef cattle, they know the costs involved better than many farmers, with this knowledge they also know, how much to pay to keep us at it.
Whenever possible, a buyer of any product will try to buy at the lowest possible price.
Pulling the price of beef, not just reduces the cost to the processor, it usually has the same effect on store cattle.
The cheaper the store today, the less they will have to pay for beef, when those come fit later in the year.
I’m of the opinion that price pull was carried out, in the hope that that some sort of payment (a winter finisher payment)
would be made available to winter finishers,
Dress it up with a nice title, include words, such as, sustainability, viable, seasonal, get it passed, money for the farmers, kudos for the farm organisation and the politicians, cheaper beef for the processors.
It mightn’t be too bad if they didn’t cap it as low as the last two years scheme.
If they are paying farmers 80% of what they are getting then how can the same factories owned by the same people pay up to 20% more for cattle in the north and in the UK? Reading through stiff on it today, its clear that mii just gave lip service. It was the same as saying "just get on with it lads, we don't give a fcuk about ye".No surprise from the latest get together.. https://www.agriland.ie/farming-new...g-ends-in-frustration-for-farm-organisations/
More manipulation of the figures from an incomplete report to suit MII . https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/grant-thornton-hits-obstacles-in-determining-beef-market-value/If they are paying farmers 80% of what they are getting then how can the same factories owned by the same people pay up to 20% more for cattle in the north and in the UK? Reading through stiff on it today, its clear that mii just gave lip service. It was the same as saying "just get on with it lads, we don't give a fcuk about ye".
People need protein and meat is protein. If meat is replaced by another protein what is its carbon footprint. The seas cannot produce any more fish and fish farming is environmentally unfriendly. So we are back to soya . We can forest down Ireland and rip up the Amazon and subsaharan Africa to grow Soya . Where are the 90 million Buffalo that were in the USA . Why should people on low income bear the cost of carbon readjustment. How many carbon producing Data centers were around in the last century.Let's look at this from a non farmer perspective, and a laissez faire one at that. (not my personal views, but a potential if somewhat cynical way of looking at all this)
Of all the meats, beef has the highest carbon footprint. That's an unpopular statement but it's factual. Not meeting our targets from the EU means more fines, so a loss of tax payers money from the local economy.
Next, we have the suggestion of a finishers payment. More tax payers money to prop up what people will begin to see as an unprofitable industry. None of this is going to be popular with John P Taxpayer.
Irish beef has a base price of around 3.70 a kilo. If we cross the English channel to La France, where the weather is better, the subsidies are largely the same, and the cost of land and other inputs is lower, the price of beef is 4.10 a kg.
People need protein and meat is protein. If meat is replaced by another protein what is its carbon footprint. The seas cannot produce any more fish and fish farming is environmentally unfriendly. So we are back to soya . We can forest down Ireland and rip up the Amazon and subsaharan Africa to grow Soya . Where are the 90 million Buffalo that were in the USA . Why should people on low income bear the cost of carbon readjustment. How many carbon producing Data centers were around in the last century.
Let's look at this from a non farmer perspective, and a laissez faire one at that. (not my personal views, but a potential if somewhat cynical way of looking at all this)
Of all the meats, beef has the highest carbon footprint. That's an unpopular statement but it's factual. Not meeting our targets from the EU means more fines, so a loss of tax payers money from the local economy.
Next, we have the suggestion of a finishers payment. More tax payers money to prop up what people will begin to see as an unprofitable industry. None of this is going to be popular with John P Taxpayer.
Irish beef has a base price of around 3.70 a kilo. If we cross the English channel to La France, where the weather is better, the subsidies are largely the same, and the cost of land and other inputs is lower, the price of beef is 4.10 a kg.
Man does need to eat, he doesn't need to fly. Man does very much want to fly, and the man who spends more time flying will have more influence and therefore more sway than you or I with a few cattle.Lie down with your carbon footprint, man needs to eat he doesn't need to fly
I would like to call bullshit on your highest carbon emissions from beef statement. There is no allowance given for the carbon the grass and clover take out of the atmosphere. Cattle aren't alchemists they don't create carbon. Your statement is the biggest set of lies that keeps being regurgitated by so called educated people from all walks of life. Some of the carbon is excreted in dung some is retained as body mass and some is left back out where it came from originally, the atmosphere.Let's look at this from a non farmer perspective, and a laissez faire one at that. (not my personal views, but a potential if somewhat cynical way of looking at all this)
Of all the meats, beef has the highest carbon footprint. That's an unpopular statement but it's factual. Not meeting our targets from the EU means more fines, so a loss of tax payers money from the local economy.
Next, we have the suggestion of a finishers payment. More tax payers money to prop up what people will begin to see as an unprofitable industry. None of this is going to be popular with John P Taxpayer.
Irish beef has a base price of around 3.70 a kilo. If we cross the English channel to La France, where the weather is better, the subsidies are largely the same, and the cost of land and other inputs is lower, the price of beef is 4.10 a kg.
The Supermarkets are full of food that competes with beef most of which are subsidised in some way or another. Your chicken is fed protein which was soya beans. The soya earns foreign currency that is exchanged for Volkswagens . There is no shame in subsidies. .
I would like to call bullshit on your highest carbon emissions from beef statement. There is no allowance given for the carbon the grass and clover take out of the atmosphere. Cattle aren't alchemists they don't create carbon. Your statement is the biggest set of lies that keeps being regurgitated by so called educated people from all walks of life. Some of the carbon is excreted in dung some is retained as body mass and some is left back out where it came from originally, the atmosphere.
If all animal numbers all over the world remained static and there was no human activity would the carbon ppms be rising like they are?
Same old bullshit, OPEC produce oil. We get punished for the emissions, Russia produce fertiliser, we get punished for the emissions. We produce beef for export, we get punished for the emissions.
Some fucking idiots in power are away with the fairy's. And people have heard it repeated so many times they believe it