RedSparrows wrote: ↑Sat Nov 02, 2024 9:41 am
safe_timber_man wrote: ↑Sat Nov 02, 2024 2:27 am
The weird drug addled South African/American billionaire now has big concerns about British farming practices and drops a pearl of wisdom.
Screenshot 2024-11-02 021125.jpg
It feels a bit dystopian when that illiterate reply is from the world's richest man, with 200 million followers, to a random far Right grifter, on the biggest social media platform on earth. Strange times!
So fucking dumb and so fucking dangerous.
Does 'state farms' means 'heavily subsidised private businesses'?!
That's just "Farms".
This probably belongs in the budget section as much as here.
I can't help thinking that the farmers may have a point, but don't do themselves any favours with their communication.
Part of that reflects our more diverse society, that we have more types of job, and more specialisation.
There'd have been a time when lots of people knew a farmer, there were lots of farmers and they were part of the society of a market town.
Now there aren't as many farmers, they appear to be relatively socially isolated (with all the issues that causes), and much of their "trade" involves form filling and interactions with giant food conglomerates.
This Isolation provides the condittions where the right has learned to agitate.
(See also fishermen, military + veterans, and certain sizes of small business, train drivers, school teachers, junior doctors, "leftie" lawyers).
Yes, you're a small group (not so small with school teachers) , but often your shared interests make you an effective lobby group.
No, you're no longer part of a shared national social fabric (It was a thing in Trumpton and Camberwick Green), so you can be shat on with limited consequences.
The fishermen are an example of a group who got both ends of the stick.
Returning to farmers.
They seem to be well organised to turn out fast and grumble about non-specifics.
"We work dawn to dusk and then all night filling forms. We make no money".
But when we townies venture into the country our eyes tend to observe six or eight bedroom farmhouses, a fleet of range rovers of varying ages outside and sprawling lands attached.
If I visit a Glasgow estate agent website and accitentally click on the "Highest price first" sort option, I see two things.
Near the top, a small selection of scottish baronial mansions of 16-48 rooms, with stables and around a hundred acres.
But above that are a selection of farms.
Unfortunately, townies like me tend to see the major success stories, and miss the smaller farms scraping a living (if they actually exist).
We draw conclusions from our very limited observations.
A challenge for any government is to direct its largesse.
How do you support the struggling hill farmer, without bunging hundreds of millions to Norfolk barley barons?
Labour traditionally lacks roots in agricultural communities, so won't instinctively know.
The tories have those roots, but aren't inclined to direct the aid.
Perhaps Starmer's more collegiate approach to governing will help here.
Can he find a rural LibDem, one of Johnson's expelled tories (Rory Stewart?) or a crossbench peer who really understands the issue.
There's certainly nothing to be gained buy hob-nobbing with a celebrity hobby-farmer like Clarkson.