Recent comments by: Cronus
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
Voters can remove you. Producers remain powerless; cheapness rules. The next person internationally is equally adrift taking whatever price– yeh, right! Co-operation to mutual benefit builds societies and economies; vagaries of markets controlled by powerful and vested interests do not. The failure of collective marketing efforts is not in Leyonhjelm’s feared socialism but in producers who will sell out the collective effort for the sniff of a dollar. “Always back the horse named self-interest, son. It'll be the only one trying” - Jack Lang. The problem is found asking a different question.
Philips Adams allegorized the election of an atheist to the papacy to the election of governments that do not govern. Markets act on self-interest, they DO NOT operate in the interest of society. Government based on counterbalancing forces is pragmatic recognition people ‘do the dirty’ on others. What is not being openly discussed is the life values acted out in the economy; those with economic clout acquire and those without lose what they have. Departments of Agriculture are about long term needs of society for food security whilst passing on a better world. Modern markets are blind in this.
What focus will drive this committee? Public good or private advantage? Private likes terminator genes and dependency on suppliers. Ashby's Law of Requisite Variety suggests let a thousand flowers bloom to find successes not abandon the field to powerful commercial interests. That requires government involvement which has effectively ceased!
The Liberals are a tea party - whatever happens in the market place is what should happen as markets resolve all problems! Indebtedness will not be managed by governments; neither side has the desire or interest in it. The PIGS of Europe demonstrate the folly of uncontrolled debt. But who has to act? Leyonhjelm alone will ensure it is not government let alone Liberals.
Liberals are essentially a "tea party", conservatives pursuing minimal government – one is on one’s own. Wisdom dictates a time to create a new life comes; assistance to change is preferable to digging deeper holes, conservatives say your on your own. R, liberals don’t want to give money to anyone! Adams allegorised the election of an atheist as pope to the election of governments that do now want to govern a.k.a liberals & labor. There will be consequences. The love of money is the root of all evil; tea party - conservative ideology has its roots in worshipping wealth.
Issues to address in situations such as drought are: damage to environment as farms fail; transition for families affected to another life; impact on strategic capacity to supply. NO LAND IS LEFT UNUSED, as sad as the situation is the outcomes desired are help with transition and minimisation of long term harm to environment and strategic capacity. About 20% of properties change hands period to period, change is the norm not the aberration to be avoided.
Why the different outcome? Boumeester pointing to a commodity based mentality that has driven agriculture is an argument that makes sense of events. Australia has shown little capacity to think and act beyond commodities. Countries such as the Netherlands have no choice – they must do as they do to have a future whereas Australia remains locked into bulk goods. Our anthem has “We've golden soil and wealth for toil”; the image of the hard working farmer shipping product to market. Money is to be made in what is done between the farm gate and the dinner plate; but that takes intelligent labour.
Adam Smith recognised human nature is about maximising one’s personal benefit and held that to serve society. The world’s top 1% now controls the same wealth as the rest. Ethics? The love of money is the root of evil – so what substance does arguments about ethical capital hold? While life is about owning stuff nothing changes. Games to be ethical are window dressing to hide Smith’s self-interest ruling life. They with the most toys when they die wins!
The world of supermarkets adopt simple strategies, one of which is use staples as loss leaders and place them to get people to move across the store going past stuff that is bought on impulse. This is a power game which customers may cry about but are happy to benefit from. How do dairy farmers get power? Governments balance the equation or? Australian supermarkets are happily eyeing dairy products coming from NZ. This is the market at work; power rules. This is the market at work; power rules. Strategic capacity to supply during adversity – dead concept.
This comes from a man who wants all Agriculture departments closed, as an agribusiness consultant one wonders if self interest is involved! Recipients of levy funds should demonstrate value per se. Inquiries seem to take forever producing no benefit. Require all levy schemes to report costs, processes and benefits. Be careful though, long term work does not fit short cycles and some will provide a "no" answer. One must let a thousand flowers bloom to find the winners.
Budget cuts don’t present justification for stopping programs – saving money is all that matters. Liberals use the bogey of debt to cut government. Water is a critical for future food security, closure of water research is absurd. Ceasing support of preparedness for exotic diseases is merely a cost shift – if disease occurs exports stop, a national responsibility. NSW savaged spending because of debt only to be shown to be $1b better off, it is my conclusion Liberals are dishonest in order to achieve ideological intent. I am expecting Bill Shorten to be the next Prime Minister.
Of course Cobb is disappointed; it would be odd if he wasn’t. Busy-ness is not the criteria for a good minister nor is being a mate. Having the ability to understand the sector and carry weight in cabinet is. Joyce has, Cobb does not. The notion capital growth is farming’s income can be allegorised as making money from buying and selling a truck not using it to make deliveries. That is bad business. Those who see agriculture in that light are not interested in agriculture.
In NSW the locust season 2010/11 turned into a very minor event. The failure, however, was in not finding out what natural control mechanisms dealt with the threat and how to use those mechanisms. The failure in NSW also continues to be DPI paying 3 times over the odds for aircraft compared to producers; all because of inane contracting procedures that are grossly excessive.
In NSW I&I is no more than a warehouse for chemicals; there was once a team of 5 who knew lots and what was happening. They have all left, largely on redundancies. The Department no longer has expertise in locusts; with perpetual rounds of redundancies there is no longer the staff to do much about anything. The public wanted fewer public servants, don’t whinge now that services aren’t supplied. The other point is why is government involved with locusts to begin with; and it is only involved with 3 out of some 60 species anyway.
The 09/10 season was beset by good conditions during which the middle generation of locusts were ignored on the basis there was sufficient feed so why bother about a few locusts (they’ll fly away so why should I bother). That led to development of large numbers of very fat locusts laying multiple times. Conditions were such that locusts continued to hatch, grow and lay into May instead of quietening down from March. Victoria is pumping $40M+ into its program, NSW is dithering with $10M – which will rapidly escalate in the face of coming elections in 2011. Whatever happens the current debt in NSW to the insect levy of $7M+ will blow out to closer $25m – recouping this debt will make the fights between the NSW Department and producers over OJD seem tame. Croppers who want long term protection MUST pay for, and spray residual chemicals, the knock down chemicals supplied wont work.