Campaign to say NO to govt compensation over pork problem

fryup · 10-12-2008 01:08PM

i'm dying for a fryup!!!

:(

should i go danish??

ven0m · 10-12-2008 01:54PM

robtri wrote: »

There is a lot of talk here about crap and not the real issue, the government needs to bail out the pork sector if it makes sense to do so financially,
basically its a questions of maths, so far we have seen 3000 jobs in the processing plants go, and if this keeps up more will follow, probably up to 4000, then the pig farmers will also go to the wall, another 1000, then the feed companies will have to let go more people, and all the subsidery business that are involved... you would probably be talking close to 8,000 jobs if not more being lost,
in the current climate, unlikely they will find more work....
so is it more finacially sound to pay out a large amount of cash now to support the industry and get a return on investment by the industry and workers ( tax )
or let them all go on the dole and continue to pay them money for at least a year and have no return on this???

3000 jobs to go - funny how it wasn't managers, only the ones who actually earn their money. What's funnier is seeing the footage of the head haunchos at some of these plants driving into the offices in their big Mercs & Beemers, I notice how they aren't terminating their leases on those to 'save money'.

The job losses are a way to try hold the government over a barrel to get the hand-out, nothing more. Ask your average pork processing worker how they feel about their bosses retaining their fancy cars, & expenses & thir jobs while they're out of work, & I guarantee you massive unhappiness over the management at these firms will be raised first. The money won't be going to workers, it'll go to being used to service expenses run up by management, who are all arriving in big cars to the meetings in Govt buildings..... how interesting that......

faceman · 10-12-2008 03:02PM

ven0m wrote: »

The Irish taxpayer over the years has not gotten any value for money where it's had to step in & fix things. We're stepping in to help greedy bankers & already there is no value, & they insist on spending lavish amounts on parties, etc, & still no sign of the big 'company cars' being done away with ..... which WE are footing the bill for twice; as customers & tax payers.

There has to come a point where tax-payer value for money comes first, & given the crisis with public coffers, that really needs to be the first question.

Thats a very short sighted statement. Surely you dont think the bank guarantee is there to serve just the banks?

Bambi wrote: »

We'd probably be saving about half the EU's budget if we werent given farmers subsidies.

If we dropped our import tariff's on foreign imports they'd knock the living p*ss out of our homegrown produce on value.

Of course you wouldnt have the peace of mind of knowing that your food is safe with that all foreign stuff.... :pac:

Most workers have spent their life handing over free money to farmers, let 'em go to the wall.

Most EU countries take EU farming subsidies.

ven0m wrote: »

Again, no-one is forcing a farmer to BE a farmer. Just like every other person in the market is being told, if you don't like your job, or want to make more money - go find one that will make you happy or make more money.

People who try defend farmers with the above act as though farmers are an entitlement-service to society. Sorry, they're not. EVERY business venture carries risk, & yes I agree supermarkets have ridiculously low buy prices for products (which I find offensive, as they charge us consumers a freakin premium for, i.e. milk. Farmers get sweet f.a. for a product, it's charged at the same rate as Petrol per litre by the consumer ..... retarded. milk doesn't need to be marketed, advertised etc - it sells itself at this stage!)

Farmers SHOULD be paid a fair price by supermarkets, but it won't happen as we live in a world where they can source globally cheaper despite shipping costs, which is the usual threat held over farmers, but hey - isn't that just the way the world is.

Farmers are not forced into being farmers. If you can't make your business work, sell it to someone who can or wants to try & go do something else. Having Joe taxpayer subsidise your business, go swing!

And to the above poster - pork isn't BANNED. There is only a guideline to not sell it until all tests are completed. You can sell it if you like & have done your own tests, much like Tesco UK have done, who are still selling Irish Pork sausages they insist have tested themselves, & which has no traces, which begs the question here.

This entire issue would be resolved quicker were PORK PROCESSORS (who are leading the compo claims here) not so ****ing greedy.

Ah the old "if you dont like it, then dont do it". Tell that to the genuine people on the dole at the moment who cant get work or similar paying to what they had. Tell that to families struggling to make ends meet due to creche and mortgage payments.

Should we tell them to give their kids back because they cant afford to take another job or a lower paid job?

trishw78 · 10-12-2008 03:03PM

this smells of rip off Ireland I don't see why the tax payer should have to stump up and pay the processors.

If the processors had any brains they'd realise that Christmas = money with all the irish pork products taken off the shelves in the run up to Christmas they'd probably make twice the money back, because people will still want their Ham and fry-ups on Christmas morning.

as it is they're losing money to the Belgians and wherever else the Ham/pork etc is being imported from.

ven0m · 10-12-2008 03:19PM

faceman wrote: »

Ah the old "if you dont like it, then dont do it". Tell that to the genuine people on the dole at the moment who cant get work or similar paying to what they had. Tell that to families struggling to make ends meet due to creche and mortgage payments.

Should we tell them to give their kids back because they cant afford to take another job or a lower paid job?

This is the crux of my point ........ some jackass bastards who are not losing a shirt are playing with ordinary joe-bust-their-ass-for-a-living lives, it's not right. But compensation should not be from the tax payer, & frankly it is as cheeky as Roddy Molloy's claims of 'it is his right to travel first class'.

bollocks ...

p.s. I retract ALL previous statements about Gordon Brown after this debaucle - http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081210/tuk-brown-s-save-the-world-slip-up-6323e80.html

p.p.s. I am one of those struggling to make ends meet (I currently earn well below industrial wages), so I really don't want to see any more incompetence being funded from the taxes I do pay. No-one compensates me for jack ****, or others like myself out there who are busting their asses trying to make their way in the world!

Whispered · 10-12-2008 03:25PM

paddysdream wrote: »

unlike most people on here ranting and raving about farming i actually do know it very well and can assure you that most irish food is produced at a loss to the producer and subsidies only compensate for the artifically low prices demanded by supermarkets
if farming was so easy and profitable why dont you try it ?
for an industrial wage you would need approx 250 acres@ say 14000 an acre ,that would need to be mortgaga free by the way
then maybe a seasonal loan of approx 35000 to 60000
sheep: average irish flock about 150ewes thats 250 lambs @ 75=18750 GROSS pre tax profit on those is about 2000 (yes2000)
mine own flock is about 6 times that so profit is about 12000 pre tax
add in subs and i still cant make average industrial wage on a highly productive large scale system with over 2 mil in assets
cattle:a joke at the mo. read any farming publication official or otherwise and it states in black and white ,over 80% of irish cattle die in debt only eu subvention keeps the industry going
tillage: not bad on a large scale ie farms 10 to 15 times national average will give a decent return ie about 30000 to 40000 a year
milk:best of the lot but an almost closed shop ,setup up costs from scratch are beyond belief
pigs:know a few medium to large pig farmers and wouldnt take a cheque from them for a fiver!!
by the way op what "unsubsidised" industry do you work in ?maybe for a large americian corp. with ida grants and low tax
maybe a civil service or gov. job with days in lieu and privelige days
how about the ifsc with its tax breaks
maybe its a bank with its bailout rescue plan
if you can show me an industry or sector that has NEVER been directly or indirectly supported then maybe you have a point

So don't be a farmer. Sell your flock, and your land your assets, get your 2mil back and enjoy your life if it's all that bad.

I bought a house two years ago, a month later I was made redundant. I didn't get a penny from the government, I didn't get a chance to go on the dole, I had to keep working so I went and got another job.

Now, my mortgage is twice what it should be, with rates going up, and house prices going down and both I and my partner are involved in the construction industry in some way, with my company already making staff cutbacks.

Why the hell should MY tax payments help an industry which goes against everything I believe in when in reality, the average joe soap, who is not going around "demanding" it, needs it just as much, if not more?

If farming is not profitable for the economy, then surely, in these times in particular, it is just an unnecessary bleed on our money?

ven0m · 10-12-2008 03:28PM

And apparently Irish Pork IS safe to eat according to Brussels, http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1210/pork.html

oh & well said Helena.

brianthebard · 10-12-2008 03:54PM

helena.ryan wrote: »

So don't be a farmer. Sell your flock, and your land your assets, get your 2mil back and enjoy your life if it's all that bad.

I bought a house two years ago, a month later I was made redundant. I didn't get a penny from the government, I didn't get a chance to go on the dole, I had to keep working so I went and got another job.

Now, my mortgage is twice what it should be, with rates going up, and house prices going down and both I and my partner are involved in the construction industry in some way, with my company already making staff cutbacks.

Why the hell should MY tax payments help an industry which goes against everything I believe in when in reality, the average joe soap, who is not going around "demanding" it, needs it just as much, if not more?

If farming is not profitable for the economy, then surely, in these times in particular, it is just an unnecessary bleed on our money?

This is complete bull****, you know nothing about how farming works. You think every farmer should just jack it in, and sell-to who? What value is there going to be for stock and land if no-one wants to be in the industry? Do you know why farmers are so intent on getting the pittance of subsidies from brussels? Cause their income in real terms has stayed EXACTLY THE SAME SINCE THE 80'S! Was the wage from your job the exact same as someone twenty years ago was getting? Maybe when you can relate to that situation you'll understand and think about what you are actually saying.
And of course farming is profitable to the economy, what a silly statement-its just not profiting farmers at the moment. Even though it should.

Whispered · 10-12-2008 04:06PM

brianthebard wrote: »

This is complete bull****, you know nothing about how farming works. You think every farmer should just jack it in, and sell-to who? .

Not every farmer, just the same people who every single year complain about something, demand money for something, I don't know a lot about farming, this is true. I grew up in a farming community though and can tell you that they are most certainly not short a few quid. Certainly better off than a lot of people.

brianthebard wrote: »

Do you know why farmers are so intent on getting the pittance of subsidies from brussels? Cause their income in real terms has stayed EXACTLY THE SAME SINCE THE 80'S! Was the wage from your job the exact same as someone twenty years ago was getting?

No, if it was I would get out of the industry. And it makes no difference to me what wages were in the 80's, fact is many many people find themselves looking for work, or else working, and not being able to afford their rent mortgage etc. But it's once again the farmers who are demanding the tax money. There is no talk about bailing anyone else out is there.

They fecked up, why should I or you pay for that? The workers will get stat redundancy as will every other worker who looses their job in these times.

brianthebard wrote: »

And of course farming is profitable to the economy, what a silly statement-its just not profiting farmers at the moment. Even though it should.

No need to be nasty brian, I asked a bloody question. From what I have read its not profitable, why is it silly to ask? :rolleyes:

brianthebard · 10-12-2008 04:37PM

helena.ryan wrote: »

Not every farmer, just the same people who every single year complain about something, demand money for something, I don't know a lot about farming, this is true. I grew up in a farming community though and can tell you that they are most certainly not short a few quid. Certainly better off than a lot of people.

You've done a survey have you? Sure some farmers have more money than some people, but its not like farminers make up the bulk of the middle class, far from it. But let's trade in gross generalisations rather than near facts yeah?

No, if it was I would get out of the industry. And it makes no difference to me what wages were in the 80's, fact is many many people find themselves looking for work, or else working, and not being able to afford their rent mortgage etc. But it's once again the farmers who are demanding the tax money. There is no talk about bailing anyone else out is there.

They fecked up, why should I or you pay for that? The workers will get stat redundancy as will every other worker who looses their job in these times.

How did "they" feck up? Which farmers fecked up? It makes no difference to you what wages were in the 80s? Well I think if you were trying to get by on a minimum wage that is grossly below the average needed for an adequate standard of living you would start to care. You complain about the money tax payers have to give farmers, when they've been paying farmers consistently less for farmers produce-has to be paid for somehow you know, and the farmers are getting screwed over as much by the tax payer/consumer as by Tesco.

No need to be nasty brian, I asked a bloody question. From what I have read its not profitable, why is it silly to ask? :rolleyes:

Because obviously people are profiting, it just happens to not be the farmers. That should be obvious.

ven0m · 10-12-2008 04:41PM

Farmers here cannot compete with the larger scale farms in Argentina or some of the other countries, & no amount of tax money will change that; it is about pure scaling. Same as the I.T. industry here cannot compete with India or the former Eastern Block countries for wages for the call centres.

As I am so often reminded we live in a free market economy, & if you can't make your business work because of foreign competition, well that's just tough **** ..... no amount to of tax money is going to help adjust for economies of scale. So Mr Bard, please explain why should tax money be used to fund said deficiencies, & where are the examples of how this has helped anytime it's been done previously in Ireland?

p.s. your economies story about tax payers paying less to farmers ... wrong, that's Tesco etc. They pay under the amount to farmers as they pull the 'we can source cheaper in argentina lark'. Since they are the world's largest buyer of produce, they control the market. Tesco have shareholders to answer to who have newer Ferrari's to buy, yachts to extend, & swimming pools to fill.

p.p.s. welcome to capitalism.

brianthebard · 10-12-2008 04:49PM

ven0m wrote: »

Farmers here cannot compete with the larger scale farms in Argentina or some of the other countries, & no amount of tax money will change that; it is about pure scaling. Same as the I.T. industry here cannot compete with India or the former Eastern Block countries for wages for the call centres.

As I am so often reminded we live in a free market economy, & if you can't make your business work because of foreign competition, well that's just tough **** ..... no amount to of tax money is going to help adjust for economies of scale. So Mr Bard, please explain why should tax money be used to fund said deficiencies, & where are the examples of how this has helped anytime it's been done previously in Ireland?

Firstly we don't live in a free market. Secondly why should I defend the free market? I won't, I don't need to. Thirdly, its not a matter of competing for foreign countries. Your examples are horribly flawed though.

p.s. your economies story about tax payers paying less to farmers ... wrong, that's Tesco etc. They pay under the amount to farmers as they pull the 'we can source cheaper in argentina lark'. Since they are the world's largest buyer of produce, they control the market. Tesco have shareholders to answer to who have newer Ferrari's to buy, yachts to extend, & swimming pools to fill.

Farming is subsidised so that taxpayers (ie consumers) get to pay less. If you want there to be an end to subsidies get ready to start spending 40-50% of your weekly budget on groceries like people used to.

Crash · 10-12-2008 05:40PM

two quick points - I skimmed over a lot of the last bits because it just became to back-and-forthy to really read.

1)It is essentially nearly impossible (or rather, prohibitively expensive, and can be more than the cost of the product) to insure against a product recall or a situation like this. Because, of course, any insurer that is thick enough to do it, in a situation like this, will end up with such a massive amount of payouts as to render themselves in the proverbial shit.

2) Consumer confidence destroyed abroad? pff. The UK has an INCREDIBLY small pork industry, with Ireland supplying a large amount via export. They won't cut purchases because they can't feasibly source another source of pork with as low overheads in shipping etc. as we have here.

Oh, and just on the process thats involved in a product recall such as this:

The costs to a supplier end up being significantly larger due to various reasons - that is, the moment that a recall is ordered, all costs from storage to the wages of the staff to remove the product from the shelves to transportation to refrigeration while a viable plan for destruction is sorted fall on the supplier.

Knock on for this is that they will generally then not pay the farmers for any pigs owed for. Now at that stage, the farmers could of course go back and attempt to get cash back from the feed mill, but the feed mill will only have a minimal amount of money, and will of course go bankrupt, forcing the farmer then to write off a huge amount as bad debts. This is what you'll see more and more of, and really why a level of compensation WILL be required - to fight against it is essentially a giant case of cutting off our nose, when we have such a large export market for our products.

AckwelFoley · 10-12-2008 06:23PM

Apparetly, according to the evening hearld, the man whos the cause of this scandal is a Mr Hogg.

I sh1t you not

Smart Bug · 10-12-2008 06:41PM

Isn't this just another excuse for the government to indulge in pork-barrell spending?

oh yeah, I'm on a roll

faceman · 10-12-2008 07:11PM

ven0m wrote: »

This is the crux of my point ........ some jackass bastards who are not losing a shirt are playing with ordinary joe-bust-their-ass-for-a-living lives, it's not right. But compensation should not be from the tax payer, & frankly it is as cheeky as Roddy Molloy's claims of 'it is his right to travel first class'.

bollocks ...

p.s. I retract ALL previous statements about Gordon Brown after this debaucle - http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081210/tuk-brown-s-save-the-world-slip-up-6323e80.html

p.p.s. I am one of those struggling to make ends meet (I currently earn well below industrial wages), so I really don't want to see any more incompetence being funded from the taxes I do pay. No-one compensates me for jack ****, or others like myself out there who are busting their asses trying to make their way in the world!

I think, to be fair, no one will disagree that (a) those knowingly responsible and (b) those who knew about this and didnt act, should be imprisoned for their hand in this. So we are all on the same page on that one!

BlindedByGInge · 10-12-2008 07:26PM

Most people here are making valid points over wether the governent should bail out the Irish pork farmers/Feed suppliers. And you can see where both sides are coming from.

But what really annoys me is people like helena.ryan coming along, not knowing anything about the agricultural sector and how much this country is dependent on it, and just telling us all about he lifes problems. Then her solution to the problem at hand here is:

helena.ryan wrote: »

So don't be a farmer. Sell your flock, and your land your assets, get your 2mil back and enjoy your life if it's all that bad.

Ya real good advice there, "if you dont like it, then just give up". Thanks we will all heed this advice, and tommorrow there will be 200,000 farms for sale in Ireland and we'll all be sitting on our 2million. Ya in your narrow mind maybe. Nobody can sell a site nevermind 200,000 bloody farms.

VenOm said well said to this ^^. Hmmm thinking realisticly I'm sure.

And as for the people who say that the subisidies should just be stopped to all private sectors have no idea of the consequences of such an action. I remind you that we do not live in a capitalist state, nor a communist one either, but rather one in between both of these where our government tries to support ALL Irish businesses. I guarantee you that every single one of your jobs have been made secure by some type of investment in a sector by our government.

We take away subsidies we obvously increase dole queues, soon to be reintroduced college fees means most of these unemployed cannot affort to return to college in hope of finding work in some other field.

Source Irish Times: "subsidies accounted for 71 per cent of farm profits” in the Republic of Ireland.
In the midlands region, net subsidies accounted for 105.4 per cent of farmers’ profits. In other words, in this region, subsidies account for the whole of farm income AND cover the losses made by the businesses. Not far behind is the west region, where subsidies account for 90 per cent of farm income"

This total, in 2007, €1.8 billion in subsidies, a tiny total in comparision to the €140 billion which needs to be invested in the healthcare system.

Take this away from farmers and you'll be happy will you? Or will you then go on to complain about how food prices will have risen by 40-50% because the only thing that was keeping them down was the subsidies. You'd better go set up the rising food prices forum quickly so.

Crash · 11-12-2008 01:17AM

Both Ireland, and to even a greater exent the UK, have a cheap food policy. In fact the Uk has one of the most socialist setups possible whereby they subsidise a ridiculuous amount of the food cost.

ven0m · 11-12-2008 09:41AM

The 10 farmers affected are getting extra compensation ..... if I ever have my own business that's affected by one of my suppliers, I'm going to gather fellow business owners also affected by same to seek compensation & a 'bailout'.

Typical Fianna Fail government politics - hand-outs to the already rich & those they are all buddy-buddy with instead of taking care of the most vulnerable, & those who need help most. Where has this magic 180 million euros come from I wonder, because it wasn't there last week?

ven0m · 11-12-2008 09:45AM

BlindedByGInge wrote: »

Or will you then go on to complain about how food prices will have risen by 40-50% because the only thing that was keeping them down was the subsidies. You'd better go set up the rising food prices forum quickly so.

This comment alone shows how little you know. Food prices in Ireland are artificially high compared to the money going to the suppliers because of Tesco's absolutely incredible buying power & negotiating power in the European & global marketplace. Tesco will source from whoever they can at the cheapest rates, & if they could avoid buying Irish altogether they would, & in alot of cases they do avoid buying Irish because we're not cheap enough.

Baby4 · 11-12-2008 09:49AM

This post has been deleted.

ven0m · 11-12-2008 11:03AM

Baby4 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If it's SuperQuinn, and under their own brand, it'll be Irish Pork, as they are fiercely proud of their pork products, moreso than any other Irish supermarket. Plus they've won numerous awards for them also.

faceman · 11-12-2008 11:35AM

ven0m wrote: »

If it's SuperQuinn, and under their own brand, it'll be Irish Pork, as they are fiercely proud of their pork products, moreso than any other Irish supermarket. Plus they've won numerous awards for them also.

And rightly so! they are the tastiest supermarket/packet sausages in Ireland! (IMO of course!)

ven0m · 11-12-2008 11:58AM

faceman wrote: »

And rightly so! they are the tastiest supermarket/packet sausages in Ireland! (IMO of course!)

We have had our arguments over various points/issues Faceman, but on this we can most definitely agree (for once - which may be a precedent!!!).

+1 sir

ven0m · 11-12-2008 01:18PM

Just to sightly pose one more question to those who think the aid is a good idea;

which is more important; 10 million euros for a cervical cancer screening programme, or 180 million euros for a pork industry which can't seem to sort itself out & was in trouble before this anyway?

Our government said it doesn't have 10 million euros for something that could potentially save thousands of lives (potentially half the population, given it's females) - so where are they getting 180 million euros from?

If they are getting it from the EU, then why couldn't they ask the EU for 10 million for the cancer screening scheme, or is it more important to keep 'their friends' happy than up to 50% of a population who keep our ministers in their laps of luxery?

If anyone can tell me it is not outrageous to pay out the compensation when we can't afford something as important as cancer screening, that person has no business claiming a position as a member of humanity.

Campaign to say NO to govt compensation over pork problem

Comments