Monday, December 15, 2008

Close the farms. Scrap the subsisides. Bring down the trade barriers

How quaintly amusing, the other day I posted about the duisasterous return to failed 1970s policies and Bob Piper, the Labour councillor decided to libnk to it and post suggesting I was cruel to the Tory Government that bravely brought about Leyland.

Not curel Bob, realistic. They were idiots for doing it and the sheer crappiness of British cars that were manufactured by Leyland is testament to what a stupid, costly and dumb idea it was.

However, it's not really that point that Bob was making. As the title of his post suggests it's all about farming, "Close down the farms, says dizzy" says the title with this comment,
I wonder if the Tories in the Shires will be arguing with equal enthusiasm for the closure of all those loss making farms, and demanding an end to the agricultural subsidies that prevent them from going the same way as our manufacturing industries?
Well as a Tory from the farming Shires and one who lives in the farming Shires I hate to piss on your cleverly laid firetrap Bob but yes I will argue for the closure of farms with equal enthusiasm.

The Commmon Agricultural Policy is nothing more that a protectionist socialist racket that props up farmers. The French gets millions, and so do the British, and even worse people like Prince Charles take subsidies and, in the most bizarre cases, actually get paid to not produce things or even throw it away.

All the while that this little socialist nonsense is going on, the very same people that advocate it, similar to yourself Bob, tell us about how we should support fair trade for Africa and other developing countries farmers because hey, we nasty Westerner colonised them years ago and we owe it to them because of the excesses of imperialism and collective guilt.

Not once do those ever so pious self righteous Leftists realise that it is their policies on trade barriers and tariffs that are holding the developing countires back. What we should be doing Bob is scrapping, with entirety, the subsidies paid to farmers across Europe. Scrap the import tarrifs that are the real barrier to African and third world trade development, and start making our own farmers compete and adapt.

If our farmers go to the wall because they cannot compete with the prices of the developing countries then so be it. That's called freedom, its genuinely "fair" trade and it will do more to raise the standards of those developing countires than any bullshit "development fund" could ever dream. Farmers will have to retrain and get a new job. Tough.

22 comments:

Bob Piper said...

Not quite managed to read it properly though, have you dizzy? The company the Tories saved, if you follow the link, was that renowned failure.... Rolls Royce. I'm sure the people of Derby and surrounding areas will be pleased to hear the Tories would have let their motor company die.

I'm very pleased to hear there is one Tory in the Shires screaming for the closure of our farming industry. I'll bet a thousand pounds to a bucket of shit it isn't in Cameron's manifesto, and the Tories won't do it, so the thoughts of a single pipsqueak blogger won't make much difference. So not much of a pissing on firetrap, I'm afraid.

Presumably the closure of all our rural post offices is on YOUR agenda too? Another one for Cameron to duck out of. Have you not considered UKIP yet, dizzy.... they're much closer to your views than cuddly Dave.

dizzy said...

"Not quite managed to read it properly though, have you dizzy? The company the Tories saved, if you follow the link, was that renowned failure.... Rolls Royce. I'm sure the people of Derby and surrounding areas will be pleased to hear the Tories would have let their motor company die."

Whilst I may have skim read it it doesn't change the point I made. i wouldn't save it.

I'm very pleased to hear there is one Tory in the Shires screaming for the closure of our farming industry. I'll bet a thousand pounds to a bucket of shit it isn't in Cameron's manifesto, and the Tories won't do it, so the thoughts of a single pipsqueak blogger won't make much difference. So not much of a pissing on firetrap, I'm afraid.

I think what you mean here is that you posted, suggested I wouldn't dream of saying something, and then when I did exactly that you're only recourse is to call me a pipsqueak.

Presumably the closure of all our rural post offices is on YOUR agenda too?

They're not being closed because they're failing. They're being closed because of EU "competition" directives. However, this idea that closure is part of an agenda is rather weak bob. Closure is not part of the agenda, its just that unlike you I'm realistic about letting the natural order of things take their course.

"Have you not considered UKIP yet, dizzy.... they're much closer to your views than cuddly Dave."

I shall remember this comment the next time you post about me being a Tory Party mouthpiece and other such crap.

My view isn't a UKIP view incidentally, it's just a bog standard libertarian view and one that would much rather help the developing world than your views which are protectionist and help to ensure that developing nations never stand a chance unless they accept handouts from good socialists who make themselves feel all warm and fluffy when they do it.

Happy Christmas you old git.

John of Enfield said...

I just love the NuLab patronising & smear techniques.

If all we pipsqueaks join together we can get rid of these socialist bullies.

Bob Piper said...

"I think what you mean here is that you posted, suggested I wouldn't dream of saying something"

Not at all, dizzy. I realise the intricacies of electoral politics tend to pass you by, but frankly, whether you say you are in favour of subsidies or not for farmers is... well, let's be blunt... completely irrelevant. The fact is the Tories will not argue for the ending of farm subsidies, nor withdrawal from the EU (which they have pushed us further in to every time they've been in government since the 1960's), because they know they would be cutting their own throats.

I do think your right-wing libertarian views are much closer to the U kippers than Dave's cuddly Tories - and actually, I've always thought of you as one of Dale's personal little puppets rather than a Tory mouthpiece.

Happy Christmas to you and yours too.

dizzy said...

I realise the intricacies of electoral politics tend to pass you by

This is roughly translated as "being a politicians means you can't be honest because you have to think about votes you see".

Thanks for the honesty Bob, you;ve just illustrated exactly what is wrong with politics today. Screw honesty, I need to win an election. I hope you put that on your lealfets when you seek re-election.

Bob Piper said...

And which seat will you be contesting, dizzy?

Oh yes, none, isn't it? But that's only because a beacon of honesty like yourself couldn't get elected.

At times dizzy, you really do live in cuckoo land.

"...politicians have to think about votes you see". That really is a classic. Where did you borrow it from? Plato? Descartes? Spinoza? Come on, confess.... you didn't think this one up yourself.... surely?

Magic. Pure magic.

chris said...

On another tack, as someone involved in the agricultural industry I can assure you that many of our farmers would also be glad to see the back of the CAP. If the industry was run on a fair and free trade basis our best farmers (among the most efficient producers in the world) would actually be able to do very well, thank you, and also be gladly free of the mind-numbing socialist bureaucracy coming from Brussels and enacted by Westminster.

John said...

Bob,

Speaking as a "pipsqueak" voter, it's the sort of repulsive, patronising arrogance displayed in your post that has ensured that neither I nor any of my "pipsqueak" friends will ever make the mistake of voting for your party again.

dizzy said...

And which seat will you be contesting, dizzy? Oh yes, none, isn't it? But that's only because a beacon of honesty like yourself couldn't get elected.

I wouldn;t want to be elected, why would anyone want to do that and become an unprincipled, dishonest broker that feared telling the truth less lose their job?

At times dizzy, you really do live in cuckoo land.

"...politicians have to think about votes you see". That really is a classic. Where did you borrow it from? Plato? Descartes? Spinoza? Come on, confess.... you didn't think this one up yourself.... surely?

Magic. Pure magic.


What is Magic Bob is that you just thought that quote up yourself. No where did I say the words "...politicians have to think about votes you see". What you;ve done here is take my words, remove crucial parts of the sentence to make up a misrepresentation which you can then mock.

There is a quaint irony that you would something I didn't say by asking me if I thought it up myself though. Go you.

Of course what I actually said was that you were essentially conceding with your comment about "the intricacies of electoral politics" that being a politician means honesty is subjugated by the matter of needing to get the votes. The cruical part that you deliberately removed of course being the bit about honesty.

Now Bob, I suggest that if you're going to insist on making shit up in order to construct piss poor arguments of mockery you try to be a little more subtle. Else you end up looking a little stupid. After all, your "quote" is directly beneath the original which bears no resemblance to you say I said. You don't just look stupid, but you look like a liar at the same time.

T England said...

Looks like you win this one Dizzy, that Piper bloke can only go on about where he thinks you borrowed that wording from & seems to be very fraustrated that you, as just a blogger, has kicked his delusional bum all over your blog ;o)

If this is the form you're on after a cold maybe you should stand out in the rain more.

More blogger power to ya :o)

patently said...

I'm sure the people of Derby and surrounding areas will be pleased to hear the Tories would have let their motor company die.

Perhaps Bob could clarify which Derby-based motor company he means?

nought.point.zero said...

Don't worry people, in 2010 we know who will have the last laugh. If you ever need confort, just have a look at all the labour held lab/con marginals, particuarly in the south and consider what will happen to them at the next election.

Bob Piper said...

dizzy, my apologies. I just translated your illiteracy into English. Lol.

Aaron Heath said...

I wouldn;t want to be elected, why would anyone want to do that and become an unprincipled, dishonest broker that feared telling the truth less lose their job?

That's such a fundamentally dishonest statement Dizzy. You're a coward.

You're a pro-Tory sop most of the time, but now you want to take the "politicians are all dishonest line", because it suits you right now.

dizzy said...

"That's such a fundamentally dishonest statement Dizzy. You're a coward."

It's no fundamnetally dishonest at all, its the truth, I don't want to be an elected politician. Never have done and never will. I only ever stood for coiuncil once in an unwinnable seat to make the numebrs up and have a laugh.

"You're a pro-Tory sop most of the time"

Love the "most of the time" hedge in that sentence. I either am a pro-tory sop or I am not. You can't have it both ways. I'm actually an individual who writes what the fuck he likes whent he fuck he likes and is anti-Government. I will be anti-Government when the Tories next hold power as well.

"now you want to take the "politicians are all dishonest line", because it suits you right now."

You're confusing deliberate lying with fearing to speak your mind thus being being dishonest to oneself Aaron. As with Bob deliberately misquoting you are extrapolating a different argument to the one I made and then attacked that.

Fact is this. We have a party political system in this country. I would happily see it disappear. I would prefer to see politicians that were independent and spoke about what they beleived, not cajoled their views in order to be someone in a party.

marksany said...

Bob & Dizzy: only one way to sort this out .....FIGHT!


The motor company was Rolls Royce which was split in 1971 into the Car company (Rolls-Royce Motors, recently bought by VW & BMW) and the aero engine company, Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd.

T England said...

Dizzy, sorry this is off topic but knowing how you like your gadgets this gadget is well worth a look!!

Terminator-like Killer Robot Unveiled by U.S Government

dizzy said...

Oh yes, why am I a coward Aaron. What am I being cowardly about? Fact is Bob misquoted me completely, made himself be a liar, and then admitted that being honest about what you beleive is subservient to winning elections. That makes him sound like precisely the sort of cunt that makes politics so fucking tedious in this country.

Jeff said...

To get back to the point about farming subsidies, and the benefits of their abolition, it might be worth having a look at New Zealand. They went through the "cold turkey" some years ago, and their agricultural industry has benefited enormously. We need to follow their lead, and post haste.

Subsidies are addictive, the more you get the more you want. French farmers and UK politicians exemplify that assertion!

Lola said...

I like Major Major's dad. He who made a fortune out of not growing alfalfa. Set aside is all about not growing alfalfa. I look at a field not gowing alfalfa every morning, no sorry two fields not growing alfalfa. Total acreage about 20. What's that 40 tonnes per year of alfalfa not being produced? Bonkers, just bonkers and all down to the CAP.

Note. For alfalfa read barley/wheat or whatever.

RareBreed said...

CAP is a subsidy of the poor not a subsidy of farmers. Without production subsidies farmers would not grow crops when prices lead to losses (particularly now most machinery is hired in - so no capital cost to recoup). Fallows would increase prices through food shortages (as happened last year now we have no grain mountains).

As a farmer I would prefer to farm without them as they distort my growing choices and flexibility to react to the market. I could actually take advantage of market fluctuations (like the New Zealanders do).

As long as your happy with food price fluctuations then so am I.

Anonymous said...

One of the other problems with our politics is that arguments become polarised into piss-and-wind positions, with n'er a thought between them. It happens with health-care: either we're for the NHS or a free-for-all model. Something similar occurs whenever politicians or professionals get onto education policy.

And so it is with agriculture. Either we want to fling wide the trade barriers, or we're all for the CAP. Never mind that our government has a responsibility to secure our food supplies in an increasingly fragile world, or that the CAP doesn't do that and is rotten to the core: Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee will step up to the plate, regardless.