General election 2020 (5 Viewers)

[Cormcolash]

two things to consider here though also - methane from cattle farming, and the actual productivity of the land.

e.g. if you can produce twice as much food per acre (figure literally plucked out of the air) off market gardening, a trite argument would be to stop producing beef, and set half your total land aside for ecological purposes. beef is not exactly an efficient way of turning natural resources into food.

I tried market gardening once and all it got me was stuck in Arnhem with a load of tiger tanks driving at me

 

[therealjohnny]

A couple of mates work on one of those government Scheme/scams. There is an unofficial cohort referred to as "the farmers" . These are long-term unemployed men who own (minimum) six seep for which they provide the bare minimum of care, but they qualify for extra government assistance for their "livestock".

bah

baaa even

 

[egg_]

Yes, and its sustainable because the maths work right now to make it that way thanks to various debt "instruments" that destroy billions of lives in the global south, and the ecology of planet with it. Neither of which are an issue because the maths work.

Erm ... is this directed at me? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

 

[magicbastarder]

beef is stupidly cheap now. i think my local spar are selling something like 800g of mince for four quid.

how much would that cost without subsidies? and how much would the price of what is now €4 worth of carrots, say, change, were subsidies removed?
or in short, what aspect of farming is most heavily subsidised?

 

[flashback]

Erm ... is this directed at me? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

As I understand it (and I don't) I think Lili's point is the mechanism by which we work out costs is broken.
That there's a system in place which is extremely myopic, and not taking into account lots of factors that it should be.

I think.

 

[egg_]

Animal farming produces very low yield food. This is bad for the planet and everything else in it.
This only happens because of capitalism.

Dude, get a grip. Animal farming predates capitalism by well over 10 thousand years

 

[Unicron]

Then there's secondary costs which are consequences of destroying the land when flooding occurs and people's houses and businesses are wrecked.

It's the building of houses and business premises on agricultural land that causes a lot of flooding.

 

[magicbastarder]

Dude, get a grip. Animal farming predates capitalism by well over 10 thousand years

farming *invented* capitalism. or was it the hierarchal society? i can't remember.

 

[flashback]

A couple of mates work on one of those government Scheme/scams. There is an unofficial cohort referred to as "the farmers" . These are long-term unemployed men who own (minimum) six seep for which they provide the bare minimum of care, but they qualify for extra government assistance for their "livestock".

bah

baaa even

Right. So, my point is (and I'm increasingly struggling here) couldn't we just squeeze by with a few less sheep, and pay those lads to be tree-ers instead.

There's probably some culchie way of saying Tree-er, a person that is rearing trees, rather than sheep (a sheep-er).

 

[magicbastarder]

the correct terms are 'sheeple' and 'treeple'.

 

[nuke terrorist]

Dude, get a grip. Animal farming predates capitalism by well over 10 thousand years

There are 7 billion plus people on the planet now, how many were there back then ?
That is the game changer - traditional livestock farming won't feed everyone now

 

[flashback]

It's the building of houses and business premises on agricultural land that causes a lot of flooding.

I'm not sure I believe that the fairly small amount of land that's covered with houses etc really contributes hugely. I'd say it's the much larger tracts of land that have been deforested and farmed into oblivion, resulting in the soil getting destroyed.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Erm ... is this directed at me? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

I'm saying I agree with you, farmers get a lot of money from the EU. What is your point?

 

[egg_]

Ah ok. No further questions, your honour

 

[Unicron]

I'm not sure I believe that the fairly small amount of land that's covered with houses etc really contributes hugely. I'd say it's the much larger tracts of land that have been deforested and farmed into oblivion, resulting in the soil getting destroyed.

A lot of new estates got built on the former flood plains of towns. There was major flood in a new build in Sallins near me about 10 years ago. People were shocked to discover that their 400k homes in a place literally named Waterways might be vulnerable to flooding.

 

[flashback]

Glad thumped sorted this out.

Anything else on the agenda for today? Or can we just call an early weekend to the session.

 

[magicbastarder]

this is why rick's closed down, you know.

 

[Lili Marlene]

A lot of new estates got built on the former flood plains of towns. There was major flood in a new build in Sallins near me about 10 years ago. People were shocked to discover that their 400k homes in a place literally named Waterways might be vulnerable to flooding.

When did all this happen btw? Was it what became ghost estates or mad decisions in the 80s or something else? and do they know why? Straight up corruption or just bad planning or what?

Genuine questions, I've just always wondered.

 

[nuke terrorist]

This thread has become the most hectic thing here for a long time alright

 

[magicbastarder]

bad planning, plus the boom where people were moving to areas that they had no knowledge of.
where the locals would be tutting and shaking their heads that someone was foolish enough to build an estate on mitchell's lower field, but people who were buying there because it's where they could afford, had no such knowledge.