Hasbeen,

It does the heart good to see at least some of it being told not only the way it is, but the way it has been for a very long while. Your pithy observation that "The farmer has somehow missed his share of the wealth enjoyed by most Australians" in its calm understatement verges upon sheer literary beauty. You could perhaps have gone on to add something like ",a wealth in the first case built or derived from historically internationally competitive rural industries in earlier years", but that would have detracted from your eloquent simplicity of expression.

A very large part of that ever-increasingly urbanised Australian community not directly seeing its prosperity as being linked to the international, or even domestic, viability of these PRIMARY industries has collectively committed at a legislative and life-choice level the equivalent of the financial error of borrowing short and lending long. Under the pressures of "free" trade and an adverse climatic situation that many are belatedly starting to recognise will soon come to threaten their claimedly non-rurally based high standard of living, or even of welfare, some are trying to 'protect their own corner'. We see many of such in these forums.

Farmers are not so much "silly" as hostages in attempting to continue in the face of adversity. Graham's trite observation that PF fails to distinguish between personal and business assets reveals a gulf in comprehension of the farmer's situation. Most farmers are both prevented practically and legally from making such distinctions. Just try to subdivide a rural property in NSW to excise the home paddock! Just try to build a fully detached second residence on UNsubdivided farm property! Just try to efficiently run a farm if you do not live on it! Just try to get a decent price for one in good times, let alone adverse times, where there is only effectively one potential buyer!

This sanctimonious querying of the fairness or appropriateness of drought assistance is disgraceful. Those doing it are standing up in the lifeboat. Sit down! Its your turn at the oars.

Forrest

Unfortunately Australia no longer "rides on the sheep's back" Primary Industry accounts for only 3% of the nations GDP. Very different from the 1950s when primary industry was 60% of GDP.

So sadly Australian prosperity has absolutely nothing to do with agriculture even though you may wish to hold onto this romantic notion it is no longer valid.

My wife's family lost the family farm due to death duties, they had to sell half the farm to pay them and it was no longer viable. So I have a limited comprehension of the problem.

With agriculture using 67% of the nations water against 9% by "city dwellers" things can only get worse.

67% of scarce water to create 3% of GDP just does not add up. Sorry I wish it was different but agriculture is a luxury we can no longer afford.

With kid's thinking milk comes from a carton and eating McDonalds fries from NZ the writing is on the wall.

Time to abandon ship guys, no amount of rowing will help now.

So what do you intend to live on Steve? 'Manufactured food', or would you like to see this country at the mercy of the rest of the world to supply it for us?

The water you keep refering to, do you feel those farmers are somehow taking it from you? Should it be diverted to cities instead so you can water your roses and wash your cars?

PF

In my own personal situation water is not an issue, I have 65,000 gallons under my garage floor and my composting loo waters my veggie patch.

I am not attacking farmers but stating reality. 80% of Australia's agriculture is exported, if every country decided that they would not import food as you suggest we would have a glut of food.

These are issues you have to face, if you want to make it a country vs city issue you will go bankrupt.

Poeple in the city (note I do not live in a city) could not give a toss where the food comes from. Price is the only issue.

These are difficult issues but being an ostrich and burying your head in the sand hoping they will go way will not cure anything.

I am trying to be constructive the answers are difficult. But they will have to be addressed sooner or later.

Actually Steve, city slickers still do rely very much on farming.
Take away ag exports from the trade balance, add food imports at
much higher costs then you pay now, the Aussie $ would soon become
the Aussie peso, then you'd pay even more.

Fact is that Aus has few efficient industries in world terms.
Mining is one, farming is another, after that it gets thin on
the ground. Fleixlbe labour policies in the meat industry would
let it operate at its potential, its city slickers holding back
farming on that one.

But you have a point about water. If climate change is for real
and stays for real, then some Eastern States farming areas are
in deep doodoo. Huge changes will have to happen. Yup some of
farming wastes water, as does some city. Only by making water
expensive and giving it a market value, will people use it wisely,
I am sad to say.

Interesting that hardly any drought aid comes to the West. I
just read an article that so many WA farmers have restructured here
during hard years in the past, that few would qualify now. So there
are solutions.

Fair go Graham,
Tons of wheat plus plenty of cheap meat and then throw in the local footy and netball teams, now they are worth much more to Australia's cohesiveness and character than reams of printer paper and nights at the opera .
Look after all farmers .[Poviding they look after the environment ]