Benefit Culture

[Earthling]

However, they pay their rent and as such are entitled to have the maintenance on such things done by the housing association/council/landlord. I'm sure that if these were private tenants and teh landlord had told them to buy their own boiler, there would be a greater sympathy for them. Regardless of what they choose to wear, they are entitled to a level of service from their landlord.

 

Spot on there, geezer

[localzuk]

Nothing trollicious about that statement. You're telling us all here that land management is best understood at a macro level. All well and good, but how does that equate to the micro level which is where the actual farming takes place? Unless your clever men and women with years of experience of university life actually know about farming, all the conferences and pieces of paper in the world won't help them, because they'll get it horribly wrong.

 

No, I'm saying that if you assume that the only people who know anything about farming are researchers with Phds, you are deluded. You remind me of Roderick Spode from Jeeves and Wooster, telling everyone that the whole of Herefordshire would be turned over to the production of beetroot, and that it had all 'been scientifically worked out'. Forgive me if I have more faith in the people who work the land to know what it's capable of.

 

Genuine question - how much time have you spent on farms and around farmers?

 

Question for you - how do researchers do their work? Do you think they spend their lives sat in offices thinking? No, they speak to farmers, they speak to other experts, they do experiments, they grow crops, they farm etc...

 

My point is quite clear - a single farmer has the experience of a single person. A researcher will gather that knowledge and use it to form their conclusions.

 

And yes, I grew up in a place where farmers were everywhere, I have lots of farming friends.

[Flatpackhamster]

Question for you - how do researchers do their work? Do you think they spend their lives sat in offices thinking? No, they speak to farmers, they speak to other experts, they do experiments, they grow crops, they farm etc...

 

My point is quite clear - a single farmer has the experience of a single person. A researcher will gather that knowledge and use it to form their conclusions.

 

Actually, that's only become your point recently. Your early point was that farmers should only farm arable because meat was using up 'too many resources'. We've ended up on this argument because of your relentless refusal to accept that farmers rear livestock on some land because it's no good for crops.

 

And yes, I grew up in a place where farmers were everywhere, I have lots of farming friends.

 

You don't seem to credit them with much ability to farm.

[Flatpackhamster]

So, did anyone see "The Great British Food Revival" last night? ... That piece of Longhorn forerib of beef looked wonderful, must go and get myself a piece of that.

 

 

I missed it last night, unfortunately. The week before was pears and garlic, and the footage shown was filmed in Tonbridge in Kent, which is where I live. The pears and apples here, of course, are the finest in the country.

[localzuk]

Actually, that's only become your point recently. Your early point was that farmers should only farm arable because meat was using up 'too many resources'. We've ended up on this argument because of your relentless refusal to accept that farmers rear livestock on some land because it's no good for crops.

 

No, my point from earlier still stands!

 

You don't seem to credit them with much ability to farm.

 

They can farm just fine, on the farm they're used to, in the country they're used to. Why don't you understand this? Take a British farmer, someone who has only farmed on British soil, and plonk them in Afghanistan, and tell them to set up a farm there. They wouldn't have a clue. How about if you got a farmer from the paddy fields in China and got him to come over here and farm rapeseed? Not a chance. Which is what I said about your argument like being about an IT person knowing everything about IT simply because he knows his own segment of the market.

[Flatpackhamster]

No, my point from earlier still stands!

 

You think it does, but it doesn't. The decision of a farmer to grow crops or rear livestock depends upon the land he's on, first and foremost. Beyond a certain slope angle, you can't grow crops, because you can't get the machinery to go up and down it. Even if the tractor will, the plough won't create even furrows. If the pH is wrong, you need to alter the pH, which means chemicals and a tractor and spraying. If the rainfall is too heavy, crops won't grow. Why do you think that Ireland ate rye bread for centuries? Too wet for wheat.

 

You said you 'know' farmers. Why don't you know this? I don't farm and I know this.

 

They can farm just fine, on the farm they're used to, in the country they're used to. Why don't you understand this? Take a British farmer, someone who has only farmed on British soil, and plonk them in Afghanistan, and tell them to set up a farm there. They wouldn't have a clue. How about if you got a farmer from the paddy fields in China and got him to come over here and farm rapeseed? Not a chance. Which is what I said about your argument like being about an IT person knowing everything about IT simply because he knows his own segment of the market.

 

If those farming techniques are so vastly different, then how is applying a top-down solution dreamed up by a researcher going to help? What will work for one won't work for another.

[MK-2]

Which is what I said about your argument like being about an IT person knowing everything about IT simply because he knows his own segment of the market.

 

My only argument there is....a person can research each area of IT and even interview people in each of those areas, but it does not make that person an expert in any of those fields, only have an understanding of each of those areas better.

Would you trust someone who came into your school and said "I've never actually worked in IT but I've researched it for a while, and you need to ditch all computers and buy all tablets, because that will be a solution to many problems?" Chances are, no matter how small on the global scale, your experience will bring up issues that the "expert" doesn't know of. It would be a similar thing if said expert interviewed 100 schools and all techs at those 100 said they would use an iPad for a smartboard machine. Great, but if the other 400 schools nearby wouldn't then just talking to those 100 means the results are skewed.

[localzuk]

You think it does, but it doesn't. The decision of a farmer to grow crops or rear livestock depends upon the land he's on, first and foremost. Beyond a certain slope angle, you can't grow crops, because you can't get the machinery to go up and down it. Even if the tractor will, the plough won't create even furrows. If the pH is wrong, you need to alter the pH, which means chemicals and a tractor and spraying. If the rainfall is too heavy, crops won't grow. Why do you think that Ireland ate rye bread for centuries? Too wet for wheat.

 

You said you 'know' farmers. Why don't you know this? I don't farm and I know this.

 

I have at no point denied this... You seem to have got an idea from somewhere that I am saying that all land everywhere can be used to grow everything. I have not said that. I have said that 70% of the world's farm land is used for animals. I have also said that saying that that land ALL can't be used for crops is preposterous. Sure, there will be a percentage that can't grow various crops, but there are crops being grown in the most desolate of places, by choosing them carefully.

 

If those farming techniques are so vastly different, then how is applying a top-down solution dreamed up by a researcher going to help? What will work for one won't work for another.

 

Oh dear god, now you're just being deliberately annoying. Did I say researchers would demand a top down solution where everywhere had the same system!? No. You just made that up.

[localzuk]

My only argument there is....a person can research each area of IT and even interview people in each of those areas, but it does not make that person an expert in any of those fields, only have an understanding of each of those areas better.

Would you trust someone who came into your school and said "I've never actually worked in IT but I've researched it for a while, and you need to ditch all computers and buy all tablets, because that will be a solution to many problems?" Chances are, no matter how small on the global scale, your experience will bring up issues that the "expert" doesn't know of. It would be a similar thing if said expert interviewed 100 schools and all techs at those 100 said they would use an iPad for a smartboard machine. Great, but if the other 400 schools nearby wouldn't then just talking to those 100 means the results are skewed.

 

You're talking about something completely different. A PhD doesn't come to a single line conclusion. They produce books full of information, detailed experiments, detailed conclusions, examples etc... Don't confuse people who claim to be experts on a subject because they read a couple of books, with people who actually follow the scientific method and actually do produce useable outcomes.

[featured_spectre]

@Dos_Box @ZeroHour @Domino @john @Ric_ or any other mod...can the topic please be split between the farming posts and the original topic please?

[localzuk]

@Dos_Box @ZeroHour @Domino @john @Ric_ or any other mod...can the topic please be split between the farming posts and the original topic please?

 

Yes please!

[MK-2]

You know what, in all honesty, I can't be bothered. These arguments get very playground-ish because neither side will even accept a single point of another side.

You two may as well just have a quick fight, then we can close this thread

[JoeBloggs]

I wish I had as much time as these guys while at work.

[localzuk]

You know what, in all honesty, I can't be bothered. These arguments get very playground-ish because neither side will even accept a single point of another side.

You two may as well just have a quick fight, then we can close this thread

 

I've as yet to see an argument against what I've said - I've seen a lot of misunderstanding of what I've said though such as:

 

1. I never said farmers know nothing, I said that they should not be the source of all knowledge on farming, scientists and researchers are a more suitable place (eg. published papers based on a plethora of sources).

2. I never said all land can grow crops, I said to say that all grazing land couldn't grow crops would be preposterous.

3. I never said there is a one size fits all solution to every piece of land and every crop in the world.

4. I didn't say that farming could happen using the current used methods everywhere in the world (eg. the mentions of slope etc, precluding current machinery from getting to it).

 

The problem from my point of view is that I've had these same arguments trotted out so many times by people that it screams that people are just unwilling to think around a problem, instead focusing on current farming methods on current land with current crops by current farmers. If we spend our entire time focusing on those things, we'll never get anywhere.

 

I wish I had as much time as these guys while at work.

 

Packaging software takes a while!

[featured_spectre]

I could always beat them up but that would get us nowhere and they would be in a mangled mess of broken bones and agony...All in all this topic has gone very badly off topic and @RingOfFlame was right, normally she is the one to derail threads but you guys derailed it so much that it needs to be split off!

[Haptic]

I think the problem is some people only ever see their point of view and let's be honest, no-one here has the right answer. If they did they wouldn't on here, they would instead be sorting it as we speak in the House of Commons......always best to see it from both sides like GrumbleDook and his fence sitting. I was always taught that unless you can see it from both sides, you will never find a suitable solution and instead merely argue your point until you are blue in the face while speaking over people and hushing their views and opinions!

 

Oh well, on and on and on and on, the world it just keeps spinning!

 

 

Chris

Edited November 3, 2011 by Haptic

[SteveT]

117 posts so I invoke Godwin's Law!!!!!

 

You're all wrong and I'm right!!!

[Earthling]

You're all wrong and I'm right!!!

 

Godwin's Law having been invoked, I'm now duty-bound to say, 'That's a bit Fascist, innit?'.

 

And then, to get my coat.

[localzuk]

Godwin's Law having been invoked, I'm now duty-bound to say, 'That's a bit Fascist, innit?'.

 

And then, to get my coat.

 

Something generic about nazis in response! Throw in a reference to Hitler too.

[Hightower]

Hmmm, reckons it's time someone got off their high horse:

 

[featured_spectre]

http://1mut.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/YOUR-ARGUMENT-IS-INVALID-meme-collection-1mut.com-81.jpg

 

 

*edit*

 

 

oh come on who neg repped me for this?!!!

Edited November 3, 2011 by featured_spectre

[witch]

As I was only mentioned in passing, as 'or any other mod' - I shan't, so there!

I have been accuseded of not getting involved with another of your threads, neph, so I am going to continue my policy of non-involvement.

 

Besides, as a pagan, liberal, vegetarian witch, I might just say the 'wrong thing' again:)

(...and I dont know how to split threads )

[RingOfFlame]

Actually, it is cows producing methane you need to be worried about:

 

Are cows the cause of global warming?

 

A cow does on overage release between 70 and 120 kg of Methane per year. Methane is a greenhouse gas like carbon dioxide (CO2). But the negative effect on the climate of Methane is 23 times higher than the effect of CO2. Therefore the release of about 100 kg Methane per year for each cow is equivalent to about 2'300 kg CO2 per year.

World-wide, there are about 1.5 billion cows and bulls. All ruminants (animals which regurgitates food and re-chews it) on the world emit about two billion metric tons of CO2-equivalents per year. In addition, clearing of tropical forests and rain forests to get more grazing land and farm land is responsible for an extra 2.8 billion metric tons of CO2 emission per year!

 

Rennie Deflatine will see you right

[featured_spectre]

LMAO!! would need a fair bit of rennie to be fair! lol

[glennda]

The people i have a problem with regards to benefits are people like somebody who worked for me doing festivals - she was unable to get a council flat due to the fact she had two steady jobs and earn't enough money to private rent (in an area of England i would regard as cheap to rent - considering mine is 3 times what she would of had to pay). So she thought the best course of action would be to give up her jobs and be kicked out of her mom's house (for no reason) so the council would give her a flat

 

 

^ that is the kind of thing that annoys me