Some times things are going on that I have no way of relating to people who aren't in the agricultural business. This story about rising prices for agricultural producers is one of those things. It very clearly explains how rising production costs are really eating into any money we might be able to make in the business. The real scary thing is what is going to happen when commodity prices crash.
Believe me, this is going to happen. With wheat prices up the way they are, everybody and their dog is planting wheat or going to plant wheat. Then there will be an overproduction scenario if not next year, the year after and then the wheat farmer will be in trouble again. Not only wheat, but other commodities can, and will, see the same scenario playing out in the next few years. The article points out more than once the production cost increase/commodity price drop of the 1980's and how we might be going to see a replay of that scenario. It won't be pretty out here if that happens.
So far the rancher hasn't been tempted by this production increase for some reason. I've talked about it a couple of times that the US whole herd numbers aren't going up like you would expect them too with cattle prices fairly high like they are. I'm not sure if the drought is the cause of that or that ranchers are brighter than the normal producer and don't want to get in an over production/price drop scenario. I just hope ranchers stay out of the big expansion scenario. I actually think they might because while prices are up some for livestock, they aren't up as big as the increases for other commodities so the desire to expand big isn't as great.
All I know is that things aren't getting any cheaper out there. Hell, I really note grocery prices going up along with every thing else causing a squeeze on cash flow around here. Over the years I have instituted a few things to lower my production costs but I am at an end of that for now. I'm out of ideas on how to lower costs and become more efficient. Trying to move to an organic, grass fed or any other specialty type operation might, I repeat might, bring more money in, but I guarantee that my costs will go up more than any money I bring in so they aren't worth it.
All I can do is struggle along. Keep fighting the good fight and making a living here on the prairie. It gets real tiring sometimes. I can't tell if that's the reason I am in a funk or if it is my normal fall funk. We'll see. All I know is don't blame the farmer and rancher for higher food prices at the store. We might be getting a little more money for our products, but our costs are up as well so we are in the same boat as everybody else. Our heads are barly above water and we are struggling too.
We may have all come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Sunday, October 14. 2007
So True
Friday, March 9. 2007
Disaster Aid Try
We all knew it was coming, the Democrats are adding agricultural disaster aid into a "supplemental spending bill." When I first saw this headline it looked like maybe Congress was finally going to get somewhere with Disaster aid for those who need it. It turns out I was wrong.
The Democrats are attaching this disaster aid to legislation that would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by next year. This is a sure way to get the disaster aid vetoed by the President if they can even get it through Congress. Reports are that the chances of getting this through the House are slim the way it is and the Senate isn't even considering anything remotly the same. Are the Democrats hoping to garner a few votes for their political Iraq agenda in the House by attaching disaster aid to it? I would say yes, that's what they are trying to do and it's wrong.
I was hoping the Democrats would be above such political games as the Republicans used to play. It appears they aren't Would it be so difficult for the Democrats to allow a vote on Disaster aid in a package all by itself that isn't attached to such an emotionally charged issue as a mandatory troop withdrawal from Iraq? Obviously it is for them.
The disaster aid needs to be severed from this bill. Even if the House passes it, it will be vetoed and they don't have enough votes to get a veto overridden. How like politicians, get desperate people's hope up that you are going to help them then play a game to insure that it will be killed so you don't have to do it. That way you can claim you support the desperate people when you really don't. They were just the pawns in a power struggle for the 2008 elections. I hope farmers and ranchers recognize how they are being used here and why. The Congress doesn't want to help them, just use their pain in a game and laugh the whole time. What a mess, thanks to Politicians.
For he who has health has hope; and he who has hope, has everything. Owen Arthur
The Democrats are attaching this disaster aid to legislation that would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by next year. This is a sure way to get the disaster aid vetoed by the President if they can even get it through Congress. Reports are that the chances of getting this through the House are slim the way it is and the Senate isn't even considering anything remotly the same. Are the Democrats hoping to garner a few votes for their political Iraq agenda in the House by attaching disaster aid to it? I would say yes, that's what they are trying to do and it's wrong.
I was hoping the Democrats would be above such political games as the Republicans used to play. It appears they aren't Would it be so difficult for the Democrats to allow a vote on Disaster aid in a package all by itself that isn't attached to such an emotionally charged issue as a mandatory troop withdrawal from Iraq? Obviously it is for them.
The disaster aid needs to be severed from this bill. Even if the House passes it, it will be vetoed and they don't have enough votes to get a veto overridden. How like politicians, get desperate people's hope up that you are going to help them then play a game to insure that it will be killed so you don't have to do it. That way you can claim you support the desperate people when you really don't. They were just the pawns in a power struggle for the 2008 elections. I hope farmers and ranchers recognize how they are being used here and why. The Congress doesn't want to help them, just use their pain in a game and laugh the whole time. What a mess, thanks to Politicians.
For he who has health has hope; and he who has hope, has everything. Owen Arthur
Posted by
in Disasters
at
05:02
| Comments (0)
| Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: congress, disaster aid, farmers, hostage, iraq, politics, ranchers, troop withdrawal
Saturday, December 16. 2006
Quite A Change
In epochal shift, half humanity to become urban
I've always been in the minority living where I do in the US but now I will be in the minority compared to the world. It doesn't bother me at all but it sure is interesting how the demographics are changing. It also underscores to me the importance the remaining rural people have.
Most of humanity's food is grown in rural areas and by concentrating people in cites they become ever more dependent on us rural folks to provide them with the basic necessity of life, food. Mentioning the basic necessities brings the thought of water to mind. With more and more people clustering in cities, what is going to happen to the fresh water of the planet in these areas? Is that going to be a problem that needs dealt with?
I'm not taking a stand one way or the other on this issue, just find it interesting and thinking of the implications for farmers and ranchers. We have been losing status for quite a while now but maybe it will start changing when people realize how dependent they are on us rural people for food. I doubt it but what the hell, one can hope.
With the world poised to enter an urban age when more people will live in cities than in the countryside, Josiah Tobiko sees no need to move from his cow dung-covered hut in rural Kenya.
"You can choose city life with televisions and mobile phones but I prefer living here," said Tobiko, a Maasai teacher who lives in a settlement of 125 cattle and goat herders with no electricity or piped water at the foot of Mount Kilimanjaro.
Tobiko, 35, moved into a new one-storey home this year -- made of tree branches tied with sisal and coated with about six inches (15 cms) of cow dung and mud.
Here in Amboseli, lions and elephants are residents' most pressing concerns, not road accidents or muggers.
"People go and live in the towns but most come back because they feel there's no culture there," Tobiko said.
He may be right but for now, more and more people are moving to the world's cities and this population shift promises to usher in an urban age -- 6,000 years after the first cities emerged in Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley.
According to U.N. data, the world's urban population is poised to surpass the rural total for the first time in history.
I've always been in the minority living where I do in the US but now I will be in the minority compared to the world. It doesn't bother me at all but it sure is interesting how the demographics are changing. It also underscores to me the importance the remaining rural people have.
Most of humanity's food is grown in rural areas and by concentrating people in cites they become ever more dependent on us rural folks to provide them with the basic necessity of life, food. Mentioning the basic necessities brings the thought of water to mind. With more and more people clustering in cities, what is going to happen to the fresh water of the planet in these areas? Is that going to be a problem that needs dealt with?
I'm not taking a stand one way or the other on this issue, just find it interesting and thinking of the implications for farmers and ranchers. We have been losing status for quite a while now but maybe it will start changing when people realize how dependent they are on us rural people for food. I doubt it but what the hell, one can hope.
(Page 1 of 1, totaling 3 entries)
