But the value of the farm is based on the amount of milk produced not the profit, so they make more milk and lose more money in order to be able to sell their farm for a higher profit.
That would make sense for the few months the farm was on the market, but not any time that you weren't seriously thinking of selling your farm. It would also make sense if you wanted to borrow a whole lot more money. I think the latter is probably what's going on here.
None of this makes sense to me but I am not an accountant.
Ditto to both of those.
I’m not suggesting it’s OK
Of course you weren't, and I'm not suggesting you were :-) I thought I was elaborating on your point.
We can adapt to anything.
Yes, I don't think many scientists would suggest that we actually wouldn't survive a climate change disaster - it's not an extinction level event for our species. But that doesn't make it OK. The people of Vanuatu will pull through, but this is still a tragic turn of events.
I do tend to agree with what Ian said earlier, though, that the horrific outcome for Vanuatu involves far more specific failures than our general human affect on the planet's climate. The quite extreme poverty of Vanuatu, leading to inadequate preparation and availability of disaster relief are very, very fixable things. But that was one hell of a storm. I'd be amazed if my house could withstand winds of that strength. What I do believe is that post-disaster the relief would come very quickly. A lot of people died from the earthquakes in Christchurch, but not so many from dehydration and starvation and disease in the days thereafter.
I’ve read a number of pieces that suggest that most dairy farms do not produce milk at a profit, the business only makes a profit because of the capital gains on the farmland.
That could only be because of debt servicing, though. Clearly a freehold farm producing twice the milk of another freehold farm the same size is going to be making more money. It can't be because the intensive farming is in some way less economically viable, otherwise they wouldn't do it. It's just that leveraging to the hilt is back in fashion. Effectively, the banks own the farms and are doing extremely well out of them.
ETA: What I'm saying is that if an intensive dairy farmer suddenly won the jackpot and became freehold, I doubt that they'd choose to be less intensive in their farm for economic reasons.
That's GE crops you're talking about? NZ's got a long way to go before it would accept that. We'd sooner aerially dust the whole place with poison to protect the cattle from TB.
Really really really no small safety net?
It's close enough to live that they couldn't edit that sequence out. Nor do I think they really would anyway - it didn't violate broadcasting standards. It was just nasty. The judge appraisal of the performances is also part of the show - it would barely have made sense, since the next judge replied to the criticism. TBH, I think it's actually turned out well that the nation saw the display, because it was the national outrage that led to the canning of the judges.
The only reality I've committed to watching over the years are the Contender types ones. They take people who are already good fighters, but missed their chance for whatever reason (usually they're too old), and they have a monster training camp with some sort of prize (typically a contract) at the end. But I've gradually lost interest, they're all the same. They do have the added dramatic impact that whoever is knocked out of the tournament has often been literally knocked out on the way, and they're understandably majorly bummed. It's an insight into the extremely precarious life of professional fighters.
Yeah I wrote something to that effect about Cowell but realized I've only like watched 20 episodes tops, which really makes me a n00b. But his online greatest insults were mostly about the acts. Because an insult is much more cutting when it's true. Otherwise it's just about the insulter.
Are we now seeing the dark side of the moon?
The back side, anyway.
Come on guy’s,isn’t this exactly how this show is supposed to go.
Well it's nice and dramatic now. I'll probably watch tonight, at least the start of it. They could have a reaction shot of the couple getting sacked. Or maybe the other judges will give them some stick. If Ronald McDonald comes in and hits them with a 2Degrees cellphone we'll know it was all an act. Eventually, it will get to the singing and they'll save Joe for last to maximize the ad-take. I'll probably skip to that.
Kinda with Craig on this. Whether any of it’s planned or not, it’s all a massive set piece.
I find it quite hard to believe, in this case. I think something quite unusual just happened.