Lucky we live in a global economic environment which softens the impact of extreme weather events on the climate. The increase in the cost of Bananas was due to protectionism as much as a cyclone, just ask a Kiwi about the cost of their Bananas last year. Or better yet, ask a Kiwi apple farmer about exporting apples into Australia.

P.S. I don't believe rising sea levels will have much of an impact on millionaires coastal property, the benefits of building sea walls far exceed their costs in these areas. Climate change will not hurt us anywhere near as much as it will hurt the third world, we can afford to adapt, they cant.

"Australian citrus growers declared recently that orange prices had risen from $80 a tonne to $200, with inevitable price hikes on orange juice.

Hehe, I remind you that that is 8c-20c a kg for oranges, which
effectively has little to do with what you pay for orange juice
at your supermarket. Given the 2.40-2.60 a litre for orange juice,
the cost of the ingredients is insignificant. Distribution,
processing, marketing etc are far large input costs. Westfield,
as owners of the shopping centre where you buy your juice, would
earn more then the grower of the oranges, from that 1 litre.

The same applies to meat, milk, etc. How much do you think is
the wheat cost, in a loaf of bread? In WA the milk producer gets
27c a litre for the milk, the consumer pays about 1.30-1.50.
If the milk was free, it would still cost well over a dollar!

What Australia does about climate change is purely a feelgood
exercise. Us 20 million simply don't matter in the bigger scheme
of things. World population keeps increasing at 80 million
a year, so if we were all wiped out tomorrow, we would be replaced
in 90 days. China opens another coal fired power station every
10 days or so. China and India, ie another 2 billion, are striving
for Western style lifestyles. Those two billion will simply wipe
out anything we do as irrelevant, thats the reality of it.

So peddle to work etc, but don't think it will make any difference,
as it won't, thats the sad reality. Ok, it will make you feel better,
but then thats what alot of this debate is about in the end.
Humans are emotional creatures who think a little, not the other way
around

(1) ”We did not know in the 1970’s that we would experience the warming that we have had through the 1990’s, neither could we have predicted that El Nino conditions would dominate the 6 years to 2007. We also don’t know for sure that we will get drought more often in the future.” – Robg

We did not know that specific system, nor, how it worked, but the “effects” of major weather trends have been known, since the 60s, based on data from the 50s.

Moreover, apt for advanced economies, the shift from agricultural economies to manufacturing has been evident for decades. Then, manufacturing to services. Luckily, Oz did make some adjustments.

I am very much aware of the protected markets in the EU, Japan and the States. If each says the protectionism must stay, because the other is protected, the system becomes self-sustaining. It sustains a protected elite. Elite not in the sense all farmers are rich; elite, in the sense, they are given “special” treatment.

If tax payer money is to be spent on industry, it should be on sunrise industries [nanotech] or profitable need to catch-up [Airbus], not dead or poorly located industries. Do not protect long-term unprofitable sectors.


(2) “Its very easy to move a shop – you just take out a new lease.” -Robg

There would be high costs involved, including losing and re-establishing patronage. Some might not survive the transaction. Farmers have the right to fail too. It is called, free enterprise. Conversely, farmers have minds and can adapt towards profitable activities.

(3) “Secondly, a farm is limited by the need for good soils and reliable water, which there isn’t much of in this country.” – Robg

So, then, one does not have a farm or moves to the water. Retrain. Sell your expertise to third world countries, with water. I am not suggesting that farmers be sent to the gallows! I am saying like others in the community they change according to the situation.

[Don't open your pork speciality shop in Tel Aviv.]

As mentioned, in Scandinavia, farmers train to work in industry “and” work on the farm. As a model, it works a bit like seasonality, between the Hemispheres, when, farm productivity is low, these farmers, go off to factories. Given Australia’s poor infrastructure, why did a ditch on a failed farm in drought, when that same ditch could be the foundation for a road?

(4) Rural Sector

The Australian GDP is largely domestic [unlike, say, an importer~re-exporter, Singapore]. Last year, reported [data for 2005?], the rural communities contributed 3.5% to the Oz economy and consumed 5%. That isn’t to say will not be successful sub-sectors, but, we may need to prune or transplant the rose. Some [profitable] roses can stay put.

-Keeping the dollar valued towards exports, in an economy not in-aggregate geared towards exports, means, highly capitalised US/EU companies have bought Speedo and Arnotts, at a good price. Overtime, their returns on that FDI leaves the country, as dividends, to other countries. That is the true domino effect.

(5) ” …agriculture sectors in all developed countries receive special attention.”

True. Agrarian socialism is a global problem. It is why Korean farmers cut-up the streets at every international trade event. These farmers can not see themselves putting on a white or blue shirt and becoming an employee [pride]. In a world of managerialism [since the 50s], being a clerk with a career to management can spell, higher income and higher efficacious productivity.

(6) Fair Comment? A Hypothetical…

Perhaps, you feel me unfair. BUT… What if climate scientists told the National Australia Bank and BHP to move its computer centres away from the coast, owing to the possibility of sea levels rising in 2020. The companies don’t. Come 2020, those billion dollar IBM mainframes are assigned to Davey Jones’ Locker. Next, we have CEO’s running around like Chicken Little:

IT’S A DISASTER! IT’S A DISASTER! GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE!

Likewise, in the 1960s, Nauru was warned to invest, don’t spend, or else. Well, you know what happened… or else, happened!

China increases it's pollution by the sum total of Australia every ten months.The Kyoto Protocol excludes China and developing countries from restricting green house gases,yet developed countries must suffer in a so called globalised community?

The end result will be that intelligent people will gravitate towards countries like China with no democracies or pollution controls.China can continue to keep their masses subjugated and enslaved,while destroying our environment with impunity.

It has been a long term agenda of many on the left to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, and they have been working away like diligent little termites for years through the UN & various NGOs to achieve it.

While there may be something basis to global warming, many on the band-wagon simply see it as another way to blame & bleed the west.

When I hear the proponents of Kyoto talk earnestly of western responsible for world woes based on per capita formulas, which effectively proscribe low population western nations like Australia with high development levels, while they put-off-till-later any talk of curtailing the population growth or industrial development of countries with populations 100 times bigger (& increasing exponentially ) , all of whom will ultimatly aspire to reach western levels of development - IT MAKES ME SMELL A BIG FAT RAT.