|
The crisis doesn't have to be something that simply prevents us from importing stuff. Global warming for example could cause food production world wide to drop enough that there's not enough to go around.
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
Mmmm rice, heavy metals...
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:What kind of crisis would stop Finland from importing food aside like an nuclear exchange? It's not like our food comes from just one country or even one continent. Eh, Ruskies don't need nucular bombs to stop Finland's imports. They just need to park their fleet in the Baltic and drop a few bombs in the North Finland. Iirc, we have about a year's worth of food and fuel in the National Emercy Supply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:Hahaha, it must take effort to be this ignorant. Aside from things like huoltovarmuus, food produced in Finland is a lot cleaner and safer than the "economically viable" stuff that's grown by slave labor in the heavy metal-ridden soil of the hellscapes of the third world. Maybe we could start some sort of agency dedicated to ensuring that the food and consumer products we eat and use are safe (radical idea, I know). We could call it something like Elintarvikkeiden turvallisuusvirasto, or Elintarviketurvallisuusvirasto, and shorten it to something like Evira. If we're going to be paying farmers to produce clean and safe food instead of just regulating it, why don't we pay the poor, low cost producers abroad instead of our fairly rich domestic farmers to try to produce food in a climate that is terrible for growing food?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Maybe we could start some sort of agency dedicated to ensuring that the food and consumer products we eat and use are safe (radical idea, I know). We could call it something like Elintarvikkeiden turvallisuusvirasto, or Elintarviketurvallisuusvirasto, and shorten it to something like Evira. If we're going to be paying farmers to produce clean and safe food instead of just regulating it, why don't we pay the poor, low cost producers abroad instead of our fairly rich domestic farmers to try to produce food in a climate that is terrible for growing food? I see you're not terribly familiar with how things like "regulations" and "standards" work in the poor countries. Edit: Also, you're literally saying "let the poors toil in the fields", which is pretty awful in its own way. Darkest Auer fucked around with this message at 14:14 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The crisis doesn't have to be something that simply prevents us from importing stuff. Global warming for example could cause food production world wide to drop enough that there's not enough to go around. If we have massive global warming that cuts food production, we can either 1) pay more for food from abroad than the citizens of these countries can pay (pretty easy given that we're a rich country) or 2) pay a lot of money for our farmers to try to grow food Option 1 is pretty much what happens now and is cheaper (and would happen even more if trade in food was free)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The crisis doesn't have to be something that simply prevents us from importing stuff. Global warming for example could cause food production world wide to drop enough that there's not enough to go around. In a capitalist economy, people don't starve because they can't produce food for themselves, they starve because they can't afford the food. If there is somekind of food production crisis, Finns will be among the last people to starve and Africans will starve while staring at the departing ships loaded with food.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:I see you're not terribly familiar with how things like "regulations" and "standards" work in the poor countries. You're right, the idea of something like my imaginary creation, Evira, regulating ALL food sales (including imported food) in Finland is a pipe dream. Oh well, time to pay the farmers another few billion Euros. Edit on your edit: And you're a moron
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
I wondered why my irony meter exploded.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:If we have massive global warming that cuts food production, we can either It's not guaranteed option 1 will always be cheaper, and huoltovarmuus is kinda like having conscription. We don't really need it for anything and can say nothing bad can happen anyway because reasons. Maybe that's true, maybe not, but personally I'd still rather have it around.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
It annoys GP, enough reason on its own.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:an entitled middle-class group The two worst things about farmers/cattle growers economic problems are probably the insane bureucracy and wildly unstable and unsure income while also having investments easily in hundreds of thousands and even millions. The Iltalehti article earlier didn't exaggarate when it said that a single minor mistake, for example crossing a wrong box, might mean losing a five figure sum as sanctions. A friend of mine who has a farm, was in panic after a cow that was supposed to be slaughtered had managed to lose both of her earmarks during the morning the truck was to arrive. They found one of them but it wouldn't have been enough since it specifically has to be attached to the ear. Had they not managed to do that, no amount of paperwork would have helped. As far as I remember, the consequences would have included something really dumb, like none of the cows being eligible for food since one of them wasn't perfectly marked or something like that. Also, according to some fast googling, the farmer average hourly wage in 2012-2014 was something like 6 euros. Apparently that has went down by 50% in 2014-2015. Valiantman fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Eh, Ruskies don't need nucular bombs to stop Finland's imports. They just need to park their fleet in the Baltic and drop a few bombs in the North Finland. Iirc, we have about a year's worth of food and fuel in the National Emercy Supply. They don't have much of a fleet in the Baltic and it's hard to park when a Gripen slams a RBS-15 in your butt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Valiantman posted:The two worst things about farmers/cattle growers economic problems are probably the insane bureucracy and wildly unstable and unsure income while also having investments easily in hundreds of thousands and even millions. The Iltalehti article earlier didn't exaggarate when it said that a single minor mistake, for example crossing a wrong box, might mean losing a five figure sum as sanctions. A friend of mine who has a farm, was in panic after a cow that was supposed to be slaughtered had managed to lose both of her earmarks during the morning the truck was to arrive. They found one of them but it wouldn't have been enough since it specifically has to be attached to the ear. Had they not managed to do that, no amount of paperwork would have helped. As far as I remember, the consequences would have included something really dumb, like none of the cows being eligible for food since one of them wasn't perfectly marked or something like that. Wages are not a relevant statistic. Farm workers get paid wages (average monthly wage in 2014 was 2500 according to TiKe). Farm workers include the guys picking berries in the summer. The farmers are the ones paying them 6 euros per hour or whatever. I feel for them, and of course they will also be hit by cuts that affect farmers, but it's the farm owners out there protesting. Farmers (farm owners) get income from their farm. Yes, it's volatile, but just as I don't expect the government to bail out real estate speculators or stock market traders who make the wrong trade, or a company that builds a plant that turns out to be unprofitable, I don't see why farmers should receive a subsidy to bear this risk. Either the return on farming is high enough for them to invest or it isn't, we can get food from other sources. I don't really care if they have to fill out forms to get government money. They're getting money for doing a job that doesn't make economic sense to do. Most of us don't have that luxury. Most of us can't just fill out some forms and then get government money to do what we want to do, we actually have to work jobs that provide things that people want at economically competitive prices and wages. If anything, the government should make the paperwork as difficult as possible to discourage farmers and maybe save us some money. edit: forgot to mention their low retirement ages and their pension system (MELA) which is the most heavily government supported income related pension system (not including KELA) Geriatric Pirate fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Yes, it's volatile, but just as I don't expect the government to bail out real estate speculators or stock market traders Most governments, including the Finnish government, have bailed, and will bail out speculators and traders as long as they're the worst possible kind (i.e. ones that gamble other people's money).
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:Most governments, including the Finnish government, have bailed, and will bail out speculators and traders as long as they're the worst possible kind (i.e. ones that gamble other people's money). Thanks for your insight
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:we actually have to work jobs that provide things that people want at economically competitive prices and wages I'm not sure if investment banking and ruining the world economy is a service people actually want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Eh, Ruskies don't need nucular bombs to stop Finland's imports. They just need to park their fleet in the Baltic and drop a few bombs in the North Finland. Iirc, we have about a year's worth of food and fuel in the National Emercy Supply. If Ruskies do that they're going to need nucular bombs
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend a text analysis software that can compare and match texts written by the same author in different languages, eg. Finnish and English? I just want to know which one of you wrote this:quote:NATON haluaminen Suomeen ja Yhdysvaltain mallien seuraaminen, on selkeä todiste siitä, että Suomi aikoo liittyä mukaan uuteen maailman järjestykseen. Suomen myyminen globalisaation käsiin ja ihmisoikeuksien rajoitukset, tulevat olemaan arkipäivää. quote:Sosiaalidemokraatit ja kokoomus käyttävät näitä tietämättömiä kansalaisia hyväksi, luodessaan uutta järjestystä ja yhtä maailman hallitusta. Mediaan uskotaan sinisin silmin ja tätä kanavaa pitkin suodatetaankin paljon epäinformaatiota. Demokratia tasapäistää meidät, turruttaa muurahaisyhteiskunnaksi, rikkaan eliitin alle ja siksi länsimaissa voidaan huonosti. Hallitusten tekemien päätösten takia järjestelmämme on hajoamassa ja juuri siksi voidaan sanoa, että ihmiset kärsivät systeemin takia. Siksi meillä on tapahtunut koulusurmat, Myyrmannin pommitus ja kaikki muut uudenlaisen ilmentymän omaavat veriteot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:If Ruskies do that they're going to need nucular bombs They've invaded Ukraine and Georgia without using nukes, and I don't see why they'd need to use them against Finland.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Can anyone recommend a text analysis software that can compare and match texts written by the same author in different languages, eg. Finnish and English? I just want to know which one of you wrote this: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:They've invaded Ukraine and Georgia without using nukes, and I don't see why they'd need to use them against Finland. Thing is, both countries had demographies that provided the context for Russia to "intervene." Finland, not so much. So unless Russia changes their military policy, I don't expect to see "little green men" in the streets any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:I don't really care if they have to fill out forms to get government money. They're getting money for doing a job that doesn't make economic sense to do. Most of us don't have that luxury. Most of us can't just fill out some forms and then get government money to do what we want to do, we actually have to work jobs that provide things that people want at economically competitive prices and wages. If anything, the government should make the paperwork as difficult as possible to discourage farmers and maybe save us some money. Farm work doesn't make economic sense only in an economy where people don't have to eat if they don't get food cheap enough. Which I suppose is true, but the negative effects related to such choice tend to be powerful enough to seriously skew the market. As a result, government-subsidized farms substantially improve the prices for food sold to Finland - we do, afterall, have a choice to transition to entirely self-sustained before we run out. And as such, subsidizing local agriculture does make sense for the government. Doubly so when those agricultural workers would be difficult to employ in other, more profitable industries.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Valiantman posted:Also, according to some fast googling, the farmer average hourly wage in 2012-2014 was something like 6 euros. Apparently that has went down by 50% in 2014-2015. Hmm. According to Tilastokeskus the average farmer/forest worker income in 2013 was around 2350 e/month. A 6 euro hourly wage would mean they work around 390 hours each month. That's 13 hours daily, 30 days a month. I don't think farmers work quite that much 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:Farm work doesn't make economic sense only in an economy where people don't have to eat if they don't get food cheap enough. Ah great, our resident juche advocate is here to tell us to subsidize food to "make it cheap" (obviously, subsidies aren't counted in the price) instead of just buying it for cheap from abroad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Hmm. According to Tilastokeskus the average farmer/forest worker income in 2013 was around 2350 e/month.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:They've invaded Ukraine and Georgia without using nukes, and I don't see why they'd need to use them against Finland. That's like saying because Rwanda can invade Congo nobody would bat an eye if they did that to Uganda. Invading chaotic post Soviet states with loyal Russian(/Ossetian/Abhkazian) minorities isn't the same thing as invading a stable EU member state that has literally no parallels with the other two situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
To be honest Russia has 100% the justification to invade us anyway, seeing that we're forcibly sterilizing Russian women and stealing children from them, even smuggling children from Russia to Finland. source: desantti Bäckman
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Hmm. According to Tilastokeskus the average farmer/forest worker income in 2013 was around 2350 e/month. The average includes work done by their children for free.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Ah great, our resident juche advocate is here to tell us to subsidize food to "make it cheap" (obviously, subsidies aren't counted in the price) instead of just buying it for cheap from abroad. This is like pissing into a sewer out of spite, but you're being willingly dense and everyone can see it, so I might as well. The advantage is in the Finnish government having a more stable negotiating position. If Finland didn't have the ability to supply itself on food, there would be motive for the suppliers to form a cartel and get substantially higher margins for their goods. Finland's remote and blocking trade enough to make it cost-ineffective to compete wouldn't be very difficult. This is rather simply what follows from the players involved acting in their own self-interest, and thus isn't even a leftist argument - subsidizing agriculture enough to prevent wide-scale starvation in the case of a trade blockade results in getting lower prices because it's harder to restrict supply to drive margins up. Free markets don't optimize for overall profit, they optimize for individual profit. This is basic poo poo, and you pretending to not understand it is frankly embarrassingly lazy. Step up yo trolling game, son.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Hmm. According to Tilastokeskus the average farmer/forest worker income in 2013 was around 2350 e/month. You may be right but Yle, in November 2014, says the average before Russian sanctions was 7 euros. Higher than the other number I found but still low. I now found the same statistic you mentioned and I fear that forestry workers do affect that number somewhat. Unfortunately, 30 days a month pretty much checks out and from what I know, working around the clock is not uncommon when the season demands it.  It was a quick googling I did but this Etelä-Saimaa article has some numbers from the same year: average hours 2000/year, average wages 20 000-22 000/year. (It should be noted that unless the farm is significantly larger than average and has hired employees, the farmers don't in practice get actual monthly wages.) My main point was and still is GP being condescending snob who doesn't know what he's talking about, though, so I don't have a beef with you. Like I said, I know a few farmers but I have to google the actual numbers. Valiantman fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:This is like pissing into a sewer out of spite, but you're being willingly dense and everyone can see it, so I might as well. Luckily for us most countries don't have an MTK so farmers generally don't operate a cartel and we're able to buy food for fairly cheap. As for trade blockade see all the other posts on this thread by others. Valiantman posted:You may be right but Yle, in November 2014, says the average before Russian sanctions was 7 euros. Higher than the other number I found but still low. I now found the same statistic you mentioned and I fear that forestry workers do affect that number somewhat. The problem with a lot of left wing people seems to be that a simple newspaper article based on anecdotes seems to shape your worldviews a lot more than the actual data.  https://www.stat.fi/til/mmtal/2012/mmtal_2012_2014-04-03_fi.pdf
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Does someone really think all a farmer does is fill a few papers to get money and that's all there is to it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:Does someone really think all a farmer does is fill a few papers to get money and that's all there is to it? No, most of them also drink loads of alcohol, abuse their families, and bad-mouth city folk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
So much like city folks, then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Demokratia tasapäistää meidät, turruttaa muurahaisyhteiskunnaksi, rikkaan eliitin alle ja siksi länsimaissa voidaan huonosti. Ennen oli kunnollista, nyt ei ole kunnollista ♫𝅘𝅥𝅯
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Luckily for us most countries don't have an MTK so farmers generally don't operate a cartel and we're able to buy food for fairly cheap. As for trade blockade see all the other posts on this thread by others. Of course income is large but how much of it do the people get? From the same document you provided (thanks, by the way): quote:Vuonna 2012 yrityskohtainen keskimääräinen tulos maataloudesta vaihtelee tukialueittain noin 10 900 ja Do you actually know any farmers if you think they have it easy in any Finnish scale? I'm not going for "I know some people so I can generalize from that" but you seem to be badly deluded. Valiantman fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Valiantman posted:Of course income is large but how much of it do the people get? From the same document you provided (thanks, by the way): Just because only part of the income is from farming doesn't make them poor. It's still income. Secondly, I don't really trust the breakdown. I don't know any farmers well enough to know their system, but for entrepreneurs reclassifying income as earnings vs capital gains (and then different types of capital gains / corporate profits) is not rocket science. Their farm income might be low because they pay themselves a salary for example. I don't know any farmers, just like I don't know any (insert many fields here). Doesn't mean that I can't draw obvious conclusions on them based on the data. Farmers are an incredibly entitled and "corrupt" part of Finnish society. Well, sorry, I sort of know one farmer. He wanted to rent a field on my parents' summer cottage's land so that he could farm it, but mainly to collect subsidies. And I've paid into the farmers' pension pool when I was getting a grant, somehow the pension payments I have to make to that pool are about double the normal tyoelake I paid when drawing the same income via a salary. Go figure (you can see some quality farmer-keskusta lobbying going on yet again when people on grants, aka young people with low mortality risk, are thrown into the farmer's pension pool, which even despite this crap needs more government support than any other pension system). Not the best impressions, but I'd be opposed to farm subsidies regardless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:stuff Granted, I don't know how much salary they pay for themselves but I can confirm that at least some do so. I know that because that's pretty much the first thing they cut since in a family business it's all their personal income in the end anyway. I could sort of see where you're coming from (not agree but understand) if you didn't call farmers entitled and say they only fill forms to get money. Their workload is insane compared to their standard of living, I can't even compare the bureucratic pressure to any other job I could come up with and their income depends really heavily on external factors that they cannot control in the slightest. I'm glad you at least put "corrupt" in the scare quotes even though I'm not sure what you implied. Every farmer I know well enough to have talked about subsidies (a handful) would agree with you about doing away with them, by the way, if only it didn't mean bankruptcy and cessation of agricultural industry in Finland. They'd rather be paid for what they do instead of it being smaller portion than the subsidies. You're right it's not economically viable to farm here in this global situation where importing and exporting is so easy. Money just isn't the only value in the equation as far as I can see it. Since you're perfecly fine with stopping farming of plants and animals in Finland and only seem to consider the economic side of the matter (at least some part of it, I don't think stopping all farming would be beneficial to either the farmers or the state) I don't think we get anywhere discussing this further.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
How big a part of maataloustuet are those grants where the state doles out hundreds of thousands of € per year to big agricultural operators? Because that at least is nothing but politically enabled wealth transfer to the big players in a certain industry. Like, presumably you need a big production capacity to get the big bucks, which is nonsensical. There's any number of better uses for public money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:15
|
|
