The RV industry is against tariffs on Chinese Poop.

We used to litho the plate for Coke and other brands of soft drinks. Of course that was when they were steel cans, and the cans always cost more than the drink put in them.

In the fast food industry inventory the cups the soft drinks come, that's the most expensive part.

free radical wrote:

fj12ryder wrote:
"I recall a study done a few years back on ways we could ‘spend’ our way out of the recession. There were several instances where really small increases going straight back to a producer could have a HUGE trickle down effect. One item really jumped out at me, adding $0.05 to every loaf of bread, this going straight back to the farmer would DOUBLE his income. FIVE cents."

This really does sound wonderful, and considering how little wheat is actually in a loaf of bread probably was likely true.

Excuse me if I jump in here,,but I thought loaf of bread is 100% wheat?
If not,,whats else it consist of,,?percentage wise?
thnx

A farmer share of a loaf of bread is about a nickel, less if the price of wheat is down. A loaf of bread is about 60% wheat, depending on whether the bread is whole wheat or white.

free radical wrote:

fj12ryder wrote:
"I recall a study done a few years back on ways we could ‘spend’ our way out of the recession. There were several instances where really small increases going straight back to a producer could have a HUGE trickle down effect. One item really jumped out at me, adding $0.05 to every loaf of bread, this going straight back to the farmer would DOUBLE his income. FIVE cents."

This really does sound wonderful, and considering how little wheat is actually in a loaf of bread probably was likely true.

Excuse me if I jump in here,,but I thought loaf of bread is 100% wheat?
If not,,whats else it consist of,,?percentage wise?
thnx

Depending on where it’s grown, the wheat needs to be transported to a milling facility to be ground into flour. That flour then needs to be trucked to a bakery. A food production facility is not cheap to build or operate. That bakery has a monstrous gas oven kept heated to ~450 F. 24 / 7 / 365 days a year. That bread then needs to be packaged and trucked to stores. The stores then take their slice (pardon the pun) of the action too. Over and above all of that is the ancillary costs like advertising, support staff, etc.

A study years back showed that the company that made the corn flakes cardboard box made more than the farmers that grew the corn itself.

As with almost anything you buy, the raw ingredients are a very small portion of the purchase price.

Sam Spade wrote:
Well you ALL should be against tariffs too......most ALL of them.

Why ? Because it is just another tax on consumers (YOU) because you end up paying it in the end. Even if you don't buy the tariffed goods, their competitors raise their prices too.

AND....all of this figures into inflation too. Do you like seeing prices going UP ?? I sure don't, especially when it is triggered by stupidity like this.

Never mind the political debate about "us" versus "them", whoever "them" might be.....tariffs are just another tax on YOU.

X2
Havent we been there before..
Those who dont learn from history tend to make the same mistakes

https://youtu.be/Tp1T7kPEdDY

colliehauler wrote:
When this all begun China was given the option to eliminate all tariffs on both sides. China did not want to do that. When we tax their goods at 15 percent and they tax ours at 35 percent do you think that is fair?

It should be reciprocal on both sides. China required GM and Boeing aircraft to have plants in China if they wanted to sell there goods in China.

A China tire company is moving to the US to manufacture tires here employing American workers and avoiding the tariffs. Same with a British steel producer moving to the US to avoid tariffs. I agree with MEMTB post above.

Sounds good in theory,,but our workers here wont work for low wages as Chinese do,,so cost of production of tires,,steel,,whatever will always be much higher imo..
I hope Im wrong but time will tell..

fj12ryder wrote:
"I recall a study done a few years back on ways we could ‘spend’ our way out of the recession. There were several instances where really small increases going straight back to a producer could have a HUGE trickle down effect. One item really jumped out at me, adding $0.05 to every loaf of bread, this going straight back to the farmer would DOUBLE his income. FIVE cents."

This really does sound wonderful, and considering how little wheat is actually in a loaf of bread probably was likely true.

Excuse me if I jump in here,,but I thought loaf of bread is 100% wheat?
If not,,whats else it consist of,,?percentage wise?
thnx

You need to re-read that USDA data, it clearly says;

“USDA classifies family farms as “any farm organized as a sole proprietorship, partnership, or family corporation. Family farms exclude farms organized as nonfamily corporations or cooperatives, as well as farms with hired managers”.”

So even though we are ‘family farmers’ (if my farms were in the US) 2/3rds of my acreage would NOT be considered ‘family farms’ because there is a resident ‘hired manager’ on the property.

JaxDad wrote:

WTP-GC wrote:

JaxDad wrote:

WTP-GC wrote:

fj12ryder wrote:
"I recall a study done a few years back on ways we could ‘spend’ our way out of the recession. There were several instances where really small increases going straight back to a producer could have a HUGE trickle down effect. One item really jumped out at me, adding $0.05 to every loaf of bread, this going straight back to the farmer would DOUBLE his income. FIVE cents."

This really does sound wonderful, and considering how little wheat is actually in a loaf of bread probably was likely true.

But in all honesty, who will believe it? How often are we lied to, prevaricated to, and have the truth sidestepped around? And then we are told that if the price of bread went up a nickel it would all go to the farmer? No one believes it, probably least of all the people behind the study. They know the farmer would be lucky to see a penny of that nickel, if he saw anything at all.

The first problem I see is that the farmer isn't who you think he/she is. The fields producing grains and other ingredients are owned primarily by large corporations, heavily divested into equity groups, foreign assets, etc. If your everyday local farmer has any part in this, their fields, equipment, and resources are probably heavily subsidized by some corporation that's selling to the bread industry. Still, he's selling his grains through a broker who will set the pricing based upon industry price indexes (controlled by the mega corp).

To say a farmer would be lucky to see a penny of that nickel may even be an over-estimation.

Wow, I’m not sure where all of that came from, but that’s urban myth territory right there!

Next we’ll be hearing those corporations all have only robots and trained chimpanzees running the equipment not a single human employee!

The TRUTH of it (according to the USDAj is that family farms own and operate 96.4 percent of the crop-producing farms in the U.S.

Pricing is based on world markets, we are all familiar with the Chicago Mercantile system.

The reality of it is that no ‘Mega Corp’ these days wants to explain to shareholders why they have billions tied up in owning dirt. That level of debt or cash investment together with higher labour costs would make it cheaper to just buy from the open market.

I'm not sure how it is in Toronto, but you should visit some of the farms I've been to. Yes, there are numerous family farms that exist which play a part in the supply chain. But in many cases, even those farms are subsidized nearly completely by the so-called mega corp. There's actually a neat documentary about farms (can't remember the name) where the farmers discuss how they are required to conform to standards by the buyers, which in many cases they can't do. However, the buyer (or some subsidiary thereof) is happy to provide loans and resources. Then you're stuck in a revolving world of obligations and commitments. But in some cases, you're forced into it if you want to sell your product. And don't think ole Joe Farmer calls up Marita bread and says he has a load of grain to deliver. It has to go through the brokers, who work with the corps and buyers.

I'm not saying that any of this is good or bad, but it just that its not always as it appears.

I think you must have drank the Kool-Aid or watched the You-Tube video........

You are trying to say that the Mega Corp. would provide farms with ‘subsidies’ (read ‘increased costs’) rather than just buy at market (lower) prices?

Gee, I’ve only been farming (as a 5th generation farmer) for a little over 40 years, I wonder why nobody ever told ME about this?


LMAO.

Big problem...your statement is misleading. Sure, "family farms" may own 96% of the crop producing farms, but that hardly means that they produce 96% of the food. According to the same website where you got that information, approximately 21% of the "value" of products sold come from non-family farms. Note that specialty products (such as organics) have a higher per-unit value vs. something like grains, beef, chicken, etc (ie the more common foods). So even those numbers are hard to comprehend. The USDA states that the vast majority of family farms gross less than $250,000 annually. Farms that small have little to no impact on the nationwide food supply chain.

I can't question your experience, just like you can't question mine. I've been involved with ag for most of my life. The effect of corporations and their control over our farms is so significant nationwide that the U.S. Congress has put forth many bills over the last decade or more attempt to limit these issues and create a more fair market environment.

If you have further doubts, next time you look at your investment portfolio, try to notice all the farm-related investments you can make.

Again and again, I'm not saying anything pro or con to this end. Big Ag has certainly helped a lot of family farmers turn their operation into major revenue producing machines. In some cases, so much so that they no longer can be classified as a "family farm" by USDA standards. This isn't a reprimand on my part, but just an exercise in discussing reality. It's like when you buy a product on the shelf that has a neat trendy brand name that you've never seen before...then you spin the package over and find out it comes from a product family that's one of the big guys. Farming has similarities to that example for sure

WTP-GC wrote:

JaxDad wrote:

WTP-GC wrote:

fj12ryder wrote:
"I recall a study done a few years back on ways we could ‘spend’ our way out of the recession. There were several instances where really small increases going straight back to a producer could have a HUGE trickle down effect. One item really jumped out at me, adding $0.05 to every loaf of bread, this going straight back to the farmer would DOUBLE his income. FIVE cents."

This really does sound wonderful, and considering how little wheat is actually in a loaf of bread probably was likely true.

But in all honesty, who will believe it? How often are we lied to, prevaricated to, and have the truth sidestepped around? And then we are told that if the price of bread went up a nickel it would all go to the farmer? No one believes it, probably least of all the people behind the study. They know the farmer would be lucky to see a penny of that nickel, if he saw anything at all.

The first problem I see is that the farmer isn't who you think he/she is. The fields producing grains and other ingredients are owned primarily by large corporations, heavily divested into equity groups, foreign assets, etc. If your everyday local farmer has any part in this, their fields, equipment, and resources are probably heavily subsidized by some corporation that's selling to the bread industry. Still, he's selling his grains through a broker who will set the pricing based upon industry price indexes (controlled by the mega corp).

To say a farmer would be lucky to see a penny of that nickel may even be an over-estimation.

Wow, I’m not sure where all of that came from, but that’s urban myth territory right there!

Next we’ll be hearing those corporations all have only robots and trained chimpanzees running the equipment not a single human employee!

The TRUTH of it (according to the USDAj is that family farms own and operate 96.4 percent of the crop-producing farms in the U.S.

Pricing is based on world markets, we are all familiar with the Chicago Mercantile system.

The reality of it is that no ‘Mega Corp’ these days wants to explain to shareholders why they have billions tied up in owning dirt. That level of debt or cash investment together with higher labour costs would make it cheaper to just buy from the open market.

I'm not sure how it is in Toronto, but you should visit some of the farms I've been to. Yes, there are numerous family farms that exist which play a part in the supply chain. But in many cases, even those farms are subsidized nearly completely by the so-called mega corp. There's actually a neat documentary about farms (can't remember the name) where the farmers discuss how they are required to conform to standards by the buyers, which in many cases they can't do. However, the buyer (or some subsidiary thereof) is happy to provide loans and resources. Then you're stuck in a revolving world of obligations and commitments. But in some cases, you're forced into it if you want to sell your product. And don't think ole Joe Farmer calls up Marita bread and says he has a load of grain to deliver. It has to go through the brokers, who work with the corps and buyers.

I'm not saying that any of this is good or bad, but it just that its not always as it appears.

I think you must have drank the Kool-Aid or watched the You-Tube video........

You are trying to say that the Mega Corp. would provide farms with ‘subsidies’ (read ‘increased costs’) rather than just buy at market (lower) prices?

Gee, I’ve only been farming (as a 5th generation farmer) for a little over 40 years, I wonder why nobody ever told ME about this?


LMAO.