Hot off the press

10 hours ago

Property Rights Australia

#LonerganSays
How much does a farmer make out of a loaf of bread?

The average price of a loaf of white bread is around $3.00. It has to be said there are some extraordinary bread specials in the big supermarkets at present and these can only be regarded as ‘lost leaders’. That is, the product is sold at a loss or break even, to entice customers into the store and hope they will also buy items loaded with profit.

The average loaf of bread has about 400 grams of flour — this is produced from around 535 grams of wheat.

When wheat is at its present price, around $250 dollars a tonne, the flour will represent around 11.35c per loaf of the input costs.

The rest of the price can be attributed to manufacturing, energy and transport costs – plus the margin for the retailer — a closely kept secret but usually around 30% to 50%.
So the wheat costs 11.35c per loaf… About 3.4% of a $3.00 loaf.

The $250 a tonne for the farmer for wheat includes inputs for the cost of seed, fertiliser, diesel, labour and machinery – and then the farmer pays a commission for an agent to sell the wheat.

So how much does a wheat grower make from a loaf of bread?

… Not much.
... Read MoreSee Less

 

Comment on Facebook

Big business is screwing us all blind and like proverbial frogs in slow boiling water most of are allowing to happen particularly mainstream media.

More like $5.

2 days ago

Property Rights Australia

'Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Western Australia: Highlighting the limits of the 'Just Terms' guarantee'
by Lorraine Finlay in The University of Western Australia Law Review
www.law.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/2958846/02-Finlay.pdf

From page 54
" As State Government laws they avoid entirely the ‘just terms’ constitutional guarantee. The interference with property rights under this framework also falls short of an acquisition, although the laws clearly have a significant impact on the property rights of individual property owners by substantially restricting what they can lawfully do with their land.

Environmentally Sensitive Areas framework has been described by the President of the Gingin Private Property Rights Group, Murray Nixon, as ‘some of the most complicated and difficult to interpret of any legislation ever’.

For example, the legislation expressly states that the grazing of stock that causes substantial damage to some or all of the native vegetation in an area will be considered clearing. Any native vegetation that is consumed by grazing stock must necessary have been substantially damaged – it has been eaten!

A farmer who finds their property declared as an ESA will effectively be unable to continue using the declared area for farming, at the risk of a criminal conviction. To continue farming they need to obtain a permit, which relies upon a bureaucrat from the Department of Environmental Regulation deciding to exercise their discretion to grant such a permit."

Go to page 62 to read 'The Case Of Peter Swift'

The Conclusion as found on page 66
" There are significant concerns regarding the protection of property rights in Australia at present, based primarily on two significant ‘gaps’ in the s 51(xxxi) ‘just terms’ compensation guarantee. The compensation guarantee does not currently extend to the States, and does not encompass significant restrictions to property rights that are imposed by government policies.

These two limitations are serious gaps in the current protection of property rights in Australia today, and they are starkly highlighted by the ESA framework in Western Australia. While the ESA framework has the laudable public policy goal of ensuring that vulnerable areas of environmental sensitivity are protected, it significantly overreaches and asks private property owners to bear the full cost of protecting land that the community supposedly values. The case of Peter Swift demonstrates the very real and human cost that has resulted from these policies, and the urgent need for some form of compensation mechanism to be implemented. "

photo 1 - Lorraine Finlay - Murdoch University, Perth
photo 2 - Peter Swift - supplied
photo 3 - cartoon by Zeg as found here - www.mannwest.com/property-rights-in-wa-an-endangered-species/
photo 4 - sourced from Farm Weekly article - www.farmweekly.com.au/news/agriculture/cattle/general-news/bureaucratic-nonsense/2644661.aspx
... Read MoreSee Less

 

Comment on Facebook

...... ^ .... Peter, Neil, Tony, Stephen Zeg, Ron, Murray, Jo, Michelle, Alan, JoNova

Unrelated, perhaps??... Whilst I don't completely subscribe to the climate change model/ thinking, the foundations of the article re carbon is pertinent the survival of our eco/ bio systems and us... clearing land and farming like we do is insanity.. www.businessinsider.com.au/so-much-co2-planting-trees-cant-save-us-2017-5?utm_content=bufferdb1bc...

Agenda 21. Totalitarianism by stealth.

Blair Knuth

+ View more comments

Load more