Scott Morrison to spell out details of $1 billion package for farmers, rural businesses.

where does the $1 billion come from, is it from the tree or the sky or is it mystical or somebody wrote a book about finance?

Select to expand quote

JEG said..

where does the $1 billion come from,

From farming. Scotty "loans money" to farmers, they and all the other connected businesses make money, pay their taxes.
Circle of life, Scotty looks like a champ in the process.

100 gigalitres of water to be gifted for farmers to grow grass in the Murray Darling system instead of flowing to Adelaide. Adelaide is going to use desal to replace it.
When I looked up some numbers on the cost of desal water the other night, I found Aus plants produce at a cost of $1-4 per kilolitre. Take a midpoint and say $2/kl. That's $200M worth of grass.
I wonder how much it would cost to import from NZ.

At least half of it would be growing grass in Adelaide, so what's the difference?

PS I just made up a statistic, cause that's what we do around here

87% of statistics are made up

Including that one

Does the city of Adelaide get its fresh water from the Murray River? I thought the water was allocated for the Southern Ocean as an environmental flow.

only two cities in the world ships dont take on water, Adelaide and somewhere is the middle east..

Select to expand quote

Gazuki said..

JEG said..

where does the $1 billion come from,

From farming. Scotty "loans money" to farmers, they and all the other connected businesses make money, pay their taxes.
Circle of life, Scotty looks like a champ in the process.

Farmers are already up to their eyeballs in debt. More loans is not the answer for most. At best it helps keep small township businesses open a little longer and delays the inevitable. More debt puts more pressure on rural communities that lasts for decades.

BTW the money comes from all hard working Australian taxpayers and the loans are only a component of the package. If businesses fail, the debt defaults to the Australian taxpayer.

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..

Gazuki said..

JEG said..

where does the $1 billion come from,

From farming. Scotty "loans money" to farmers, they and all the other connected businesses make money, pay their taxes.
Circle of life, Scotty looks like a champ in the process.

Farmers are already up to their eyeballs in debt. More loans is not the answer for most. At best it helps keep small township businesses open a little longer and delays the inevitable. More debt puts more pressure on rural communities that lasts for decades.

BTW the money comes from all hard working Australian taxpayers and the loans are only a component of the package. If businesses fail, the debt defaults to the Australian taxpayer.

Well, what is the answer? It sounds like for some that they only option they have is walking off. Droughts don't go forever, and isn't the idea that these loans can allow them to survive until the next good times?

How do you know its not the answer for most? I don't know either, but the farmers themselves are the ones that are going to have to take that gamble.

What are you arguing? You can't be arguing that they just be given free money as then it would again fall to 'the australian taxpayer'.

You are arguing that loans are not the answer. Even no interest, then low interest loans, with a payback period a reasonable time in the future.

So, what is the answer that is good for the farmer and for us in general?

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..
100 gigalitres of water to be gifted for farmers to grow grass in the Murray Darling system instead of flowing to Adelaide. Adelaide is going to use desal to replace it.
When I looked up some numbers on the cost of desal water the other night, I found Aus plants produce at a cost of $1-4 per kilolitre. Take a midpoint and say $2/kl. That's $200M worth of grass.
I wonder how much it would cost to import from NZ.

That is were possibly all the money from government are going too. Instead of farmers - all money are directed to the pocket of big industrial business. Like desalination plant in this example, which don't need / can not exist on their own on commercial basis. As a "farmer" sitting on 500 acres I did apply for some relief in this drought stricken area near Dalby, QLD.Maybe in the from of some loans/support to setup water tanks for cattle, and new wells.The answer is/was that I do not qualify , because area is designated as affected by drought for 10 years already and none of government money can be spent on those.

So the reason for refusal is drought. I hope than my cattle my understand this logic.

If there is any chance I could see some benefit from this government scheme? Any advice will be welcome.

It is not more debt, Its interest-free for five years. The idea is farmers don't have to pay interest on current loans until it rains. Just one of many strategies to decrease financial stress. Not a bad idea, at least the government is trying.

It is more debt. If you need another 200 grand to get through, how do you not borrow that money??
If your current loan is 800 thou and you need another two, doesn't that take your debt to a million..really!?

Select to expand quote

Gazuki said..
It is not more debt, Its interest-free for five years.

Just because it's interest free doesn't mean it's not debt. Of course it's a debt. It's not a grant.

They are currently paying high interest on just say $1m, they take government loan and payout existing loans meaning you have no interest to pay for the next five years.
5% of $1m x 5ys is a decent saving. Maybe enough to get them through until it rains.

Well, I guess I didn't figure on that. Would that be legal, taking into account the value of the property etc. I would have thought that the existing loan would be separate from any increase, otherwise the government would have to become mortgagers.
If farmers were going to manipulate the loans to suit themselves, the government would run out of the allotted funding quick smart.

Some of these farms run upwards of 10 million dollars, and I would bet that the conditions of the loan would have stipulations that preclude existing mortgages. Just my thoughts..

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..

... The answer is/was that I do not qualify , because area is designated as affected by drought for 10 years already and none of government money can be spent on those.

So the reason for refusal is drought. I hope than my cattle my understand this logic.

If there is any chance I could see some benefit from this government scheme? Any advice will be welcome.

My guess is that you bought this property when it was already known to be in drought. Did the previous owner get top dollar because it was in drought? I guess not.

Are you really a farmer, or just a hobby farmer that has stocked a few cattle for something to do?

I hope that the drought relief funding is targetted at real farmers, and not just someone that has bought property cheap and stocked it with a few head of cattle.

I wonder if those people who poo pooed Tim Flannery for warning about worsening droughts and fires in Australia are feeling a little bit silly now.

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..
I wonder if those people who poo pooed Tim Flannery for warning about worsening droughts and fires in Australia are feeling a little bit silly now.

Is this a worse drought though, or just something that happens often in Australia?

From my perspective there is a reason that Australia is covered in the vegetation it is, and not in dense tropical plants. Its the only things that can live here, living as a compromise between water requirements and growth rate.

Again, you can check rainfall history on the BOM.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

Macroscien said..

... The answer is/was that I do not qualify , because area is designated as affected by drought for 10 years already and none of government money can be spent on those.

So the reason for refusal is drought. I hope than my cattle my understand this logic.

If there is any chance I could see some benefit from this government scheme? Any advice will be welcome.

My guess is that you bought this property when it was already known to be in drought. Did the previous owner get top dollar because it was in drought? I guess not.

Are you really a farmer, or just a hobby farmer that has stocked a few cattle for something to do?

I hope that the drought relief funding is targetted at real farmers, and not just someone that has bought property cheap and stocked it with a few head of cattle.

My time on this planet is very limited , and in comparison to whole Australia just a blink. If I do setup some wells, fencing or water tanks it is going to last longer then me. My farm production is like any other farm in Australia, so if this drought relief is not for farm like mine, who could/should benefit anyway? Desalination plants operators ? Anything above 50 Ha is considered as commercial, not hobby farm.Looks like government relief is designated also to peoples , kids, family growers not agricultural production.Otherwise could be called subsidies to agri production. And we obviously not going to subsidise or just support this food production in Australia because have better things to do and invest in. There is trend to grow urban population without any limits. Apartments everywhere from Gold Cost, Sydney to Melbourne.But what those millions of people intended to actually do there ? Beside eating, manufacturing waste, consuming energy and time in traffic, growing even more city dwellers. Shouldn't wise government support rather developments of outback Australia? Send those thousands of unwelcome immigrants > 300 km inland in order to develop the country evenly. But to do so you need basic infrastructure and availability of goods. But billions will be spend to mitigate growing traffic gridlock in big cities ( every one in Australia) and almost nothing on roads and railroads inside. If you look at the rest of the world there are some cities at some distance of the ocean, sometimes even without any river near by.


Take as example Las Vewgas- 400 km of the coast. Prosperous city that existing in the middle of nowhere.

If you build modern rail track to inland Australia you could setup city anywhere, don';t need to wait for Chinese to come and do it for you.

Let's not forget that the Morrison govt cut funding to nsw fire and rescue by 35.4% in june 2019. 13 million dollars that could have helped nsw in these troubled times. Hopes and prayers mean nothing if you're basically contributing to a disaster.

Select to expand quote

...FormulaNova said..

Here it is how it works.If government could spend 10k on subsidy to farmers like me to build a well or water tanks, irrigation , then I need to spend another 300k- 500k on basic infrastructure. Than mean I do contribute those 500k to local economy and GST alone return 50k to government coffers. 500k on infrastructure my mean basic accommodation, storage sheds, fencing , water and power, roads, some machinery.Then there is outgoing benefit from agri production from unused land.It may be case where $1 spend on outback development will bring back $10 to the country economy.

Select to expand quote

pepe47 said..
Let's not forget that the Morrison govt cut funding to nsw fire and rescue by 35.4% in june 2019. 13 million dollars that could have helped nsw in these troubled times. Hopes and prayers mean nothing if you're basically contributing to a disaster.

I just heard on ABC news proud announcement that NSW is proudly announcing purchase 3rd air water tanker for the state. Over my farm I have every week 3 Black Hawks helicopter ever flying , doing nothing else then noise that scary cattle.Being smart general in our ADF I would rather order 100 brand new helicopters tankers that could drop napalm on enemies in the case of war effort. But in the peace time could serve well for country. The our army may have plenty of chance to exercise in firing water buckets onto bushfire targets.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
Is this a worse drought though, or just something that happens often in Australia?.

According to most farmers, meteorologists and scientists, yes it is.

When you have farmers, local mayors and the NSW premier all saying the conditions are quote "unprecedented" you do have to acknowledge the truth.

Remember, it's still only November....

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..

Take as example Las Vewgas- 400 km of the coast. Prosperous city that existing in the middle of nowhere.

If you build modern rail track to inland Australia you could setup city anywhere, don';t need to wait for Chinese to come and do it for you.

A simple google of Las Vegas will tell you that it was started as it was on a train route, there was some fresh water there, and then later it flourised because of the Hoover dam.

Hardly just a prosperous city in the middle of nowhere when it has good access to electricity and water. Want to nominate a place like that in Aus and we can concentrate on that.

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..

FormulaNova said..
Is this a worse drought though, or just something that happens often in Australia?.

According to most farmers, meteorologists and scientists, yes it is.

When you have farmers, local mayors and the NSW premier all saying the conditions are quote "unprecedented" you do have to acknowledge the truth.

Remember, it's still only November....

indeed, it does sound like its the worst or at least one of the worst.

Given that any attempt to countrer climate change (whether human induced or otherwise) would take a while, what is the answer? If people hadn't scoffed at Tim Flannery and done something about it immediately, would it have changed anything in a relatively short time? When you look at the history of droughts during European settlement in Aus, its not exactly a recent change, even if this one is severe.

Nothing to do with quick fixes, but at some point, our nation's leaders have to accept the truth and deal with it for the long term.

At present, our PM is in denial and actively avoiding the issue.

If the situation is accepted at face value, then it's not getting any better is it mate?

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

train route, there was some fresh water there, and then later it flourised because of the Hoover dam.

Exactly the same you may have here.
All you need is rail road, a bit of water and endless electricity from solar farm. Building solar farm is much cheaper then any dam, although small dam could be helpful to capture and keep some water inland instead of pushing as quickly as possibly into ocean.If you travel outback queensland plains the most visible by the road will be depth water marks. Open space and marks showing you 1 or 2 meter deep water. Because Australia suffer from those two : drought and bushfires then flooding. Unfortunately not at this same time. Both bushfires and flooding do happen regularly and cyclical. Cycle is maybe long - could in years or decade, but if you could capture that flood water it should last you till next one.Vast deserted areas are almost worthless but you decide to convert them into wetlands and lakes- there will be cry, what the waste of land and unique fauna.

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..
Nothing to do with quick fixes, but at some point, our nation's leaders have to accept the truth and deal with it for the long term.

At present, our PM is in denial and actively avoiding the issue.

If the situation is accepted at face value, then it's not getting any better is it mate?

The most annoying is now blaming global warming for everything. Blame climate change and you are instantly excused from thinking and reality. I guarantee that heat , dry seasons will happen almost every year for next one hundred years in Australia, as it did for thousands or millions of years.But unlike most of the public belief changing our climate to become suddenly moderate and according to our wishes in not easy task - or I would say almost imposible. Manipulating global climate by installing solar panels may seems PR stunt , but doesn't effect outcome what nature could throw at us.Why government now to be responsible for their actions, preparations and task force to tackle bushfires if much easier will be blaming global warming ?

Select to expand quote

pepe47 said..
Let's not forget that the Morrison govt cut funding to nsw fire and rescue by 35.4% in june 2019. 13 million dollars that could have helped nsw in these troubled times. Hopes and prayers mean nothing if you're basically contributing to a disaster.

Here is amount that our country and other do waste every year. Because humans have imprinted in mentality constant fight for peace. Will fight to last person left to keep the world safe and peaceful even if need to kill all in order to achieve that goal.For rational and logically thinking civilisation abandoning wars and weapons in first place could be better start to achieve that.

Now we could compare this to Fire service budget and resources.

Unlike those military that did not engaged a single overseas attacker, offender in anger in last 70 years , those brave firefighters fought 6000 fires every year in NSW alone. ( 420,000 real actions since WWII?)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_and_Rescue_NSW