As we are all aware our farmers, or, some of them have had a pretty rough time of late.

Take the banana farmers up north, they have had it rough, so we, the tax payers come to the rescue.

Now while this may seem the right thing to do, just think about the farmers that don't get effected.

Take bananas.

Normally sell for about the mid $2 per kilo, now, $12 per kilo, so, the farmers that have bananas to sell are making a killing.

So, how about a scheme that takes the 'excess profits' from the 'lucky farmers' and gives it to the 'unlucky ones' at their time of need, thereby relieving the burden the us, the tax payers.

As it stands, we the tax payer, the 'farmers saviour' get screw twice. Firstly, we contribute part of our taxes to those effected, then, their brothers in arms screw us because they all of a sudden are presented with this monopoly.

Of cause, bananas are just one example.

Is there any merit in this?

Rehctub

Our farmers have always been agrarian socialists, demanding their right to make private profits in good times while the taxpayer subsidises their self-chosen lifestyles during hard times.

Not for them the cruel system of 'capitalism', although they still insist on the 'benefits' of the 'free market' and align themselves with the neo-liberals in party politics.

So, why would they even consider such a 'communist' plan as you suggest?

And, if you think the banana growers who are currently selling their 'product' at a higher rate (do they get the higher rate or does it just flow direct to the supermarkets?) why not apply your formula to every other industry that has high and low performers in it?

In fact, why not institute a system of taxation that takes from the rich and gives to the poor, unlike the system we have now?

Or, fund public schools at a rate that allows them to deliver a good education to the mass of students who attend them, rather than advantaging 'faith' and 'private' schools?

And so on....

So, your suggestion would only have merit if you are calling for a complete overhaul of our economic and social system, which, I suspect, is not your intention at all.

when i was young i worked in fruit and veg
taking your bannana's at the back of every veg freezer i ever saw is a wall of green bannanas...[recall we were in a huge banana glut]

every supplier would be stacked to the eyeballs with green bananas
[funny how a strong cyclone season puts them on notice]

anyhow there is no reason for increased prices of bananas
its sheer oppertuinism

but i do feel for the poor farmers
selling their cows for the same prices for the last ten years
or the apple farmers getting 35 cents a kilo for apples

just in case you missed it
farmers have long bonded together
they have the most lobby groups of all those who lobby

they have their own publications own media outlets
deal in millions..and are great at turning a dollar into two

im not feeling sorry for them
too many do..poor them..poor you
now what will your govt do?

Rehctub firstly those banana farmers are not making a killing at $12 a kilo. There is less to sell. Thanks to the impact of natural disasters and it is simple supply and demand at play.

Blue Cross your comments are spot on.

I think it's a great idea. They could have a motto like "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". It has a nice ring to it.

Perhaps the State could set prices centrally too?

TBC>>And, .. why not apply your formula to every other industry that has high and low performers in it?

Simple, because to my knowledge no other industry or body gets support like the farmers do when they hit hard times, and this is the cruts of my thread.

The farmers who have sustained huge losses get supported, while those who escaped, make a killing.

Pelican >>Rehctub firstly those banana farmers are not making a killing at $12 a kilo. There is less to sell.

Wrong. These farmers that have not been effected by disasters have exactly the same amount to sell, in fact, with regards to crops with a 'quick turnaround', they will often plant more in an effort to take advantage of their win fall.

Now the point of my thread is to suggest that instead of the excess profits going to the 'lucky few' unaffected farmers, why not either give it back to the 'tax payer', or, make these farmers pay the extra into a farmers fund. Either way, the tax payer is indirectly better off as their taxes are assisting other worthwhile cases.

Of cause like many things this will be very difficult to enforce and would require honesty, something that usually gets cast aside when money is involved, and not just by farmers I might add.