Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

If you think child labour is efficient......moral......and safe.....

BS. The larger operations have the advantage of scale. Their labour cost per acre/hectare is much less.....even fuel costs are a factor. The larger machines although much more expensive...signifigantly reduce the fixed cost per acre/hectare by virtue of their productivity.

It is time you abandoned your utopian "organic farming" notion of a few chickens running around the yard and a coupla hogs in an outdoor pen. "Old Yellar" was a movie......"Little House on the Prairie" was a TV show.

   

Labour cost per hour is cheaper????

If I'm farming my 1,200 to 1,500 acres, I'm doing all the work. Not paying wages. Smaller operations get more bang per acre. Not sure where your opinions come from. Farm much?

The advantage of scale IS the advantage of time. Being big is what gives you the breathing room to wait for the markets instead of having to sell right away to pay the bills.

   

So perhaps the question is how can these bills be reduced, spread thoughout the year, paid with loans rather then higher intrest credit cards. I fail to see why this is the governemtns responsibility nor why farmers be denied freedom. Of copurse your democracy instead of freedom dream is blind so seeing us of little relevence.




Fact is though land is cheap and lower per acre costs do not reflect cost effectiveness

   

Now flip that little sentence 180 deg and go look in a mirror.

Well if you've got lower per acre cost, and higher per acre yield, what exactly is it that makes the other guy more efficient?

   

Overhead, implement costs, higher per acre income.

   

democracy is good for police, foriegn policy, basic social support, but not the ecconomy where lazzez fair is ideal. Democracy should come after liberal freedom.

   

Robair

Where do your opinions come from? Can you differtiate soybeans from kidney beans at 100K/h driving down the line?
Robair


sasquatch2 wrote:


Obviously your problem is not reasoning but reading.



So you are admitting the familly farms are under capitalized because they lack efficiency. If they were efficient, they would not have capital problems but instead have tax problems.



I recall visiting a fellow with a small operation here in Ontario, who did not grow corn because he could make more money growing barley. He enumerated his costs, seed and fertilizer. When I pointed out that he had omitted land cost, machinery cost (depreciation etc.) his response was he didn't have any because everything was paid for. With management skills like that it came as no supprise to me that he now lives an a street and his neighbour, with the "star-wars" machinery is now cropping his land.

BTW Stalin's liquidation of the Kuloks (sp) resulted in famine.

In the '70's the statistics were 4% of farmers produced 95% of the food and farmed 75% of the land.
If you think the small guys are so effiecient/productive.....what school of economics did you attend????....the UAW?????????.........

   

I hove no idea where you get that from. I am talking about single desk system for grain in western Canada. Without the current system, it is up to the farmer to play the market. This would be fine, except most farmers have bills that need to be taken care of at the end of the season. Can't make it much simpler than that.

Ah, I was wondering what made you an expert on farm management. Seems you visited a farm once.

   

I disagree. If you get into the huge operations you have to either

A - pay mechanics to maintaine and repair implements or

B - finance a bunch of new John Deere's every three years

We never pay for repairs with the exceptions of parts, and that's only if we can't machine the parts ourselves. Instead of financing another new four wheel drive, we invested in two Kirovets tractors. We upgraded the hydraulics and good to go. Paid cash for both of them. Also looking at upgrading from an axial flow Case IH to a Don1500. Much cheaper AND more capacity.

A few mechanics, one engineer an a machinist/millwright in the family operation means our equipment costs are quite low.

Now labour, you want workers this summer, you get to compete with the oil patch. Have fun paying a competitive wage.

Neither of those arguments fly. Bigger is not always better.

The big guys can wait longer than the little guys without the CWB and they know it. That is why they are the vocal MINORITY wanting the demise of the CWB. That is just about the only advantage to going bigger.

   

Robair

Actually this guy was a neighbour of mine.
Iwas selling him seed.

I am a graduate of the Ontario agriculture College of the university of Guelph.
I am a recent retiree.
That's my agricultural expertise what is yours attending UAW meetings?

   

Robair

Yeah well....perhaps we agree on one point....buying John Deere green is a social problem.....

However......There IS only one brand of corn planter and it shall be green......after that the rest is BS.

Regardless the make maintainence is mandatory---more guys should buy a grease gun.

I recall selling alfalfa on the stump and having to virtually rebuild every mower-conditioner (the sicklebar variety)that showed up----then made a bit of a business of it.

Failure to keep tension on the suspension springs resulted in bent frames and guards pointing everywhere. Not rocket science. Forage blowers also required attention. Dealers used to bring new and used blowers for setup.

The bigger operators hardware required little or no attention but they were thorough enough to bring their stuff over for a check.......just in case.

Although maintainence is necessary...it seems that you either pay depreciation or maintainence.....there is no downtime on depreciation.....for best results around here you need enough hardware to plant all your corn in less than a week. You simply cannot be replacing a clutch in planting time.

   

'Shrug' Could be, not much corn in SK.

Well like I said, with a smaller operation you can do the maintenance yourself. We have never, EVER paid for it. From complete rebuilds to small repairs we do it right on the farm. And depreciation? We pay cash for these beauties:

Generally less than 20K, can't depreciate much from there. They'll out pull any ag equipment made in america.

   

Yes, like you say the hydraulics are a problem.....which can be upgraded.

Upgrade the electricals as well.......Belarus and Zetors were wiring nightmares.

The russian designer's credo is:

"Designed by genius' to be operated by idiots."

30 years back a neighbour bought a big New Belarus.....which burned up and seized.....no warrenty

It was a Canadian agency selling them who had no intent to warrenty just sell.

   

[/quote]
guys without the CWB and they know it. That is why they are the vocal MINORITY wanting the demise of the CWB. That is just about the only advantage to going bigger.
[/quote]


What about minority rights? And if there is a fundemental advantage to going bigger why should the government oppose it?

for summer months there are people such who farm from time off, high school kids, and other options, oil is certain competition. Te big thing though is were a farm is designed so that one person is owrking 20 hour days at seeding and harvest but at no other time of the year. It is these operations where a farm has trouble paying for itself and if the farmer owns equipment may not be able to get enogh use for it to be profitable.

   

Knoss

For crops farmers the reality is that labour is not the common "labour" variety and the help must possess operating skills which are highly marketable in construction and the oil patch.

The labour need is also mostly concentrated to planting and harvest. In my world those periods were heaven---no nights.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next