Fw: Poor markets/too few farmers

Greg and Lei Gunthorp (hey4hogs@kuntrynet.com)
Fri, 17 Apr 98 07:33:46 PDT

I seen an interesting post on the Farm Journals discussion board. The Farm Journal is the
"ideal" for conventional agriculture publications. They were discussing the commodity prices,
poor markets, and the loss of farms when along came Fred Lundgren. I thought some others might
be interested in the information. Fred said it was OK to post this on the sanet.
The web address to look at the replies from other farmers is below.
I'd love to see some discussion on the issue of profitability, lack of farmers, and in turn lack of strong
rural communities. We have our work cut out for us to put 3 times as many family supporting farms back on
the land!
We had an organizational meeting last night in North East Indiana to start a sustainable ag orginazation. We
had 34 people show up! Many thanks to Steve Bonney and Rich Molini for helping us get started. We are going to
make a difference in our little part of the world.
Best wishes,
Greg Gunthorp
Gunthorp's Pasture-ized Pork
LaGrange, Indiana (a stones throw from Ohio & Michigan)
hey4hogs@kuntrynet.com
Visit our farm at www.grassfarmer.com

----------

>
> New message has been posted in Farm Journal Conferences
>
> Forum: General
> Thread: Poor markets
> Author: Fred Lundgren
> Subject: prices
>
> URL: http://www.farmjournal.com/Forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=1&Message_ID=16449
>
>
> Gentlemen:
>
> I was asked to join your group. I wrote a book on this subject called "The
> Nature Of Wealth". It is a hobby for me. I don't care to argue but I will
> take the time to offer some new blood to the mix.
> The economic distance between the farmer, who is a producer of raw materials,
> and the beep at the consumer's grocery counter is called the trade turn. It
> is the rollover of labor and raw material dollars as products are produced and
> consumed. This trade turn, in the year 1900, was about 1 to 2. That means one
> person was on the land or sea or in the mine with capital and labor for every
> two persons employed elsewhere with capital and labor.
> As technology advanced, this ratio advanced too. In the 1930s it had grown to
> 1 to 3.5. In the 1950s it had grown to 1 to 5. Today, it has grown to 1 to
> 7.4.
> This is a normal or "parity" trade turn. It says that one person should be
> employed in raw materials production, agriculture, forestry, fishery, mining,
> recycling, etc. for every 7.4 persons employed elsewhere.
> When prices fall too low to maintain these ratios, (which increase over time
> consistent with improvements to the state of the art) either excessive capital
> debt or labor exploitation must fill the gap if consumption is to continue.
> Today the actual ratios have moved far away from the ratios dictated by the
> state of the art to about 1 to 20.
> Today, too little value is placed on raw materials at the first point of sale,
> so our economy is forced to make up the shortage with debt and the
> exploitation of the least powerful.
> It is easy to short the price of a farm product that must be produced 365
> days in advance of a one day demand. It is so easy to keep the minimum wage at
> 1/2 of the level needed to keep people off public assistance. Gentlemen,
> supply and demand (in storable commodities) or manual labor is a farce. The
> term shrinks the perimeters of discussion and should never be used as a
> fall-back position by "us", the quasi-intellectuals of the Internet.
> Here is the bottom line! Today, the total public and private debt is a bit
> over 15 trillion. This amount is the accumulated shortage, year by year, of
> the value we have refused to pay ourselves as a society at the first point of
> sale, for natures bounty since 1900.
> All unemployment and under employment can be isolated in the same way. Total
> unemployment each and every year since 1900 has been the difference between
> the numbers of people who should have been employed in raw materials
> production, based on the state of the art ratios and the actual numbers of raw
> materials producers. This is not a matter of debate. This is not theory. This
> is the physics within an economic system. Subject closed!
>
> Sincerely:
>
> Fred Lundgren
>
>
>
>

To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".