Life on the farm … Is it worth it?

[farmaholic]

From the guy who brags about his second home in Florida. Why should taxpayers support your second home in Florida?

Why does society have to pay for and support people who made poor life choices, never took opportunity, never even tried to succeed or get ahead? I know not everyone was born into the same set of circumstances but.....

So instead of putting up with envious haters suffering from schadenfreude.....we should all quietly go about our business and daily lives.

Since when was having something a sin, getting a good start doesn't ensure success, some who got everything for nothing also blew it. Working, maintaining and growing an inheritance requires work and an effort. Try following some of those guys around sometime, you might be happy with having LESS!

[bucket]

As usual I will go off topic but isn't there help for people buying a home worth up to 500k and then if you live in the GTA or vancouver the government will go as high as 800k....

Last time I looked those homes can only make money if sold so it is a direct capital gain play subsidized by the federal government.....its not sustainable...

I don't see a 50k handout on a new drill, sprayer or combine that will help support the rest of the economy for years and also mitigate the effects of climate change if you believe that religion as well...

It is also not sustainable to continue the consolidation of farms to make the workers transients....Russia tried it already and that is where we are heading where those connected to politicians survive and thrive...

Already seen that with Bill Boyd and the GTH scam with his landlord and buddies in Regina....and the hutterites got the land....probably with a kick back


Is that where agriculture is heading...its OK but the results have been proven by the Russians already....the only hope is that maybe Canada finds its way again like Russia has and puts some emphasis on the value of agriculture....

Anyone know a guy like Grant Devine that actually understood agriculture and its many facets....he treated agriculture like a diamond in the rough....he started polishing the sides and the value came long after he left....that is vision.....

Brad Wall and Yerry Ritz lacked that insight and vision...one was a football fan...the other was a snake oil salesman.....no wait one was a football fan and the other was an ostrich farmer ...both are snake oil salesman....and left agriculture and by extension ...the economy...worse off....thats their legacy...

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Farmers need really good safety nets to offset the additional risk of weather and markets.

Supply management farmers get tremendous support in this country and the system works very well.

We could have much better safety nets. But those safety nets should be targeted to small and medium sized farms that need the net to survive and not end up bailing out out really big farms who shouldn't get taxpayers help to build a bigger ego driven empire that puts all the small and medium sized farmers at a big disadvantage.

Rural communities are much better and more sustainable when there a lot of successful small and medium sized farms rather than a handful of giant corporate operations that suck up all the land and resources.

Taxpayers will not support subsidies to giant corporate farms.

OK, lets convert livestock and grain farming to supply management. Who decides which 10% of canola growers get to stay in business supplying the domestic market profitably, and which 90% can go get jobs in town because they are completely priced out of the global market?
Similar for other products:

We export half of our beef/cattle, 70% of our soybeans, 70% of our pork, 75% of our wheat, 90% of our canola and 95% of our pulses.
Over 90 percent of Canada’s farmers are dependent on exports as well as about 40 percent of our food processing sector.

Who decides what is a big farm vs. a small or medium farm?

[bucket]

OK, lets convert livestock and grain farming to supply management. Who decides which 10% of canola growers get to stay in business supplying the domestic market profitably, and which 90% can go get jobs in town because they are completely priced out of the global market?
Similar for other products:



Who decides what is a big farm vs. a small or medium farm?

Politicians will decide who stays and who goes....it's already happening....

[Zephyr]

Reality tweety, Why should we farmers work with 1928 horses to grow grain. You want farmers like the poor peasants in China or Mexico or any other shit hole country.

The Parasites got out of hand in Canada and once they got a taste of all the money they could take its like drugs you just have to get more.

No, but Canadian farmers want the flashiest, most "high tech" stuff in the world, then, many have no clue how it even works.

Just has to be bigger, flashier, and better than the neighbour.


Not saying your farm is like that, but I See it with my neighbours all the time... One guy outdoes the other... doesn't make more net profit, but looks good.


On top of that, most have no idea what the technology they are buying is actually worth, what it cost to create, and the 1000% markup being charged on it, or the cheaper alternatives to it.

[Partners]

We are all in the same business.
But have nothing incommon with our neighbors. Except shitty prices and inputs.
However all are at different ages..different debt loads..
Some are positive. Some are totally negative..
Some can make it a 9 buck canola.
Next would still be broke if it was 15 bucks.
Access your situation and make the right decision for yourself.
No rules in life.
Be happy because regardless of our current ages..there will be only so many crops we will plant.
Bring on 2020..

[flea beetle]

Farmers need really good safety nets to offset the additional risk of weather and markets.

Supply management farmers get tremendous support in this country and the system works very well.

We could have much better safety nets. But those safety nets should be targeted to small and medium sized farms that need the net to survive and not end up bailing out out really big farms who shouldn't get taxpayers help to build a bigger ego driven empire that puts all the small and medium sized farmers at a big disadvantage.

Rural communities are much better and more sustainable when there a lot of successful small and medium sized farms rather than a handful of giant corporate operations that suck up all the land and resources.

Taxpayers will not support subsidies to giant corporate farms.

Just like they don’t support subsidies to bombardier?

[tweety]

Reality tweety, Why should we farmers work with 1928 horses to grow grain. You want farmers like the poor peasants in China or Mexico or any other shit hole country.

The Parasites got out of hand in Canada and once they got a taste of all the money they could take its like drugs you just have to get more.

Reality is, there is plenty of money in it, otherwise there wouldn't be AgriTrade full to the rafters of obscenely huge and expensive equipment. So quit yer whining times are tough, because they aren't. And if they are tough, get your costs in line.

[flea beetle]

Reality is, there is plenty of money in it, otherwise there wouldn't be AgriTrade full to the rafters of obscenely huge and expensive equipment. So quit yer whining times are tough, because they aren't. And if they are tough, get your costs in line.

How when a used anything is more than anything new was 5 years ago? And parts prices are double. And service is $150-$170/hour?

[grassfarmer]

OK, lets convert livestock and grain farming to supply management. Who decides which 10% of canola growers get to stay in business supplying the domestic market profitably, and which 90% can go get jobs in town because they are completely priced out of the global market? Similar for other products:

Not that I'm advocating for SM to be extended to other sectors but the picture, if we were to, is not as bleak as you portray. As an example beef at ranch level you might call a $50/head margin business - with some type of SM system the margin to the rancher might increase to $400/head (and the store price of beef could remain the same). So instead of needing 200 head a rancher would need 25 head to return the same margin. We wouldn't need to lose any ranchers, they would just need to keep less cattle which in turn allows for a reduction in inputs, reduction in production costs and less overstocked pasture situations.
The same principle would apply to other products to an extent too. Not saying my numbers are accurate but the principle applies. Primary ag producers need to get a bigger share of retail dollar that's the problem.