"Yabby, I suspect your argument assumes that demand for beef is completely elastic and that if there is twice the beef available at half the price we will eat twice as much beef per capita."

Graham I think you have overlooked the fact that a major % of
the meat we produce is in fact exported. That market is huge and
fairly elastic. As it happens this year, we won't even fill our
US quota by November this year! The same with lamb, lots goes to
international markets, especially from WA, where the population
is low. Having extra workers when needed, often seasonaly, would
solve many problems, Govt inflexibility on this one is the
problem.

Regarding the dole, how much can your house in the city be worth,
before you don't get it anymore?

Leigh - I do not receive a sent from the government. Apart from the fact that DR is too hard to get, I am one of those ‘good managers’ you speak :) “It works both ways” don’t assume that us country bumpkins have no experience in the city either.

GrahamY – So, if a farmer is willing to sell off his farm/home at a pittance to some huge pastoral company just because we are in drought, move into a house in town, you would be happy for him to receive the dole?? I thought this argument was about being fair.

Your comment about selling all but the house paddock is hardly fair either. The price of a city house compared to the average family farm? Pretty even mostly.

Thank you pericles – it would seem that some here believe their food is ‘manufactured’ and are completely out of touch with were it comes from and why we need Australian farmers.

Steve – I am a diversified farmer, barley is only a part of what I do. We grow barley to feed our own stock, which, by the way, are not exported. Why is ok for other industry to export but not agriculture?

Yabby

It is my understanding that a principle residence is exempt from the asset test.

Although if the land of principle residence is greater than about 4 hectares it is deemed to be income producing under the income test.

The point your are trying to make is?

Well my point is this Steve, if you want to make it fair, so make
it fair. If somebody with a 1.5 million$ mansion in the city can
get the dole, why can't a farmer with a farm worth 500 thousand?

If city people don't have to move anywhere to find a job, why
should country people?

Yabby

I think I have made the point many times that I agree that farmers should be able to get the dole.

I suggest that if someone has a house worth $1.5 million the dole would hardly pay the rates.

I live in a regional area, the population of my town is 30,000. If someone on the dole where I live was offered a job 100 kilometers away they would have to take it.

The inequity as I see is is that a person has to liquidate all their assets (except their home) to get the dole. Thus removing the capacity to use that capital to tide them over until better times arrive.

Yet farmers under drought EC can keep all of their liquid assets and even earn $10,000 of off farm income waiting for better times to arrive.

Maybe the answer is to extend this to all dole recipients not just farmers.

Steve I was not having a go at you. To be honest, I don't know the
rules about dole eligibility, I've never had a Govt subsidy or
payment in my life lol. You seem to know the rules, thats why
I asked.

Grahams point is that things should be fair. Ok so make them fair.
The lines between business and private are hardly existent these
days. How many people operate a computer-online business from their
homes? Heaps, along with the home office, the home share trader etc.
etc.

So my point is this: If you want to make a cut off point for the
dole, make it on total asset value, whether that be farmland or
city land. That is really the only fair way.

Where we draw that line in the sand, ie. eligibility for dole
payments, is for others to think about. Mine is a point of
philosophical principle of fairness and the same treatment for all.
I still think that total asset value is the fairest way to do it,
not how many acres is your back yard etc.