is there an eqivalent scheme in thailand?

[giggsy]

Rt Hon. David Miliband MP
Secretary of State
Dept. for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs(DEFRA),
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P3JR

21 March 2009

Dear Secretary of State,
My friend, who is in farming at the moment, recently received a cheque for ┬г3,000 from the Rural Payments Agency for not rearing pigs. I would now like to join the тАЬnot rearing pigsтАЭ business.
In your opinion, what is the best kind of farm not to rear pigs on, and which is the best breed of pigs not to rear? I want to be sure I approach this endeavour in keeping with all government policies, as dictated by the EU under the Common Agricultural Policy. I would prefer not to rear bacon pigs, but if this is not the type you want not rearing, I will just as gladly not rear porkers. Are there any advantages in not rearing rare breeds such as Saddlebacks or Gloucester Old Spots, or there too many people already not rearing these?
As I see it, the hardest part of this program will be keeping an accurate record of how many pigs I haven't reared. Are there any Government or Local Authority courses on this?
My friend is very satisfied with this business. He has been rearing pigs for 40 years or so, and the best he ever made on the was ┬г1,422 in 1968. That is тАУ until this year, when he received a cheque for not rearing any.
If I get ┬г3,000 for not rearing 50 pigs, will I get ┬г6,000 for not rearing 100? I plan to operate on a small scale at first, holding myself down to about 4,000 pigs not raised, which will mean about ┬г240,000 for the first year. As I become more expert in not rearing pigs, I plan to be more ambitious, perhaps increasing to, say, 40,000 pigs not reared in my second year, for which I should expect about ┬г2.4 million from your department. Incidentally, I wonder if I would be eligible to receive tradable carbon credits for all the pigs not producing harmful and polluting methane gases?
Another point; These pigs that I plan not to rear will not eat 2,000 tonnes of cereals. I understand that you also pay farmers for not growing crops. Will I qualify for payments for not growing cereals to not feed the pigs I don't rear?
I am also considering the тАЬ not milking cowsтАЭ business, so please send any information you have on that too. Please could you also include the current Defra advice on set aside fields? Can this be done on an e-commerce basis with virtual fields (of which I seem to have several thousand hectares)?
In view of the above you will realise that I will be totally unemployed, and will therefore qualify for unemployment benefits.
I shall of course be voting for your party at the next general election.
Yours faithfully,
R.W.Giggs

Dear Mr Giggs,

Ah, I see you recently made a "donation" to the Labour party, so the cheque will be in the post.

We in the Labour party specialise in paying people for doing f*ck all, as it's out intention to bring an ever increasing proportion of the UK economy under our control.
In future, we will spend more of our money on subsidising the long term unemployed & encouraging them to breed like rats, so that they have many offspring who can go around thieving & will eventually vote Labour. For many years, there has unfortunately only been a minority who chose to avoid work, but now thanks to our economic management many more decent people who want jobs will be dependent on our handouts. We may even need to print money for this.
We know Socialism has failed in the USSR, Eastern Europe, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Cuba etc, but who cares when in just a few short years in the cabinet we can build up vast pension entitlements & receive all sorts of benefits. Some of which are even tax exempt thanks to special tax concessions which are applicable to MPs only.

We advise you to carry on playing on the LEFT WING at Old Trafford for as long as possible. When you retire, we would like you to stay in the UK so you can pay 45% tax on your investment income, for us to waste. I mean, nobody would emigrate if we increase the top rate of tax to this level, would they?

Mr Brown
Prime Minister (until 10 May 2010)

The current Labour leadership are about as socialist as Margaret Thatcher.

That's exactly how the friends of the Labour party at the BBC would like the electorate to see it. Obviously this strategy is working.

The reality is the Labour party have increased public spending to well over 44% of gdp, even before this economic crisis. This has been funded by about 60+ tax increases & excessive borrowing.
In global terms, this is very much at the socialist end of the scale. Outside Western Europe, government spending of 30% of GDP or less is very common amongst developed countries (using pre-recession figures).

In one respect, you are right about Mrs Thatcher being socialist, as contrary to BBC propaganda, public spending on healthcare & the like did increase every year under MrsT.
As a proportion of GDP, Mrs T did restrict public spending slightly, but not sufficiently to raise the UKs economic competitiveness to the levels of Japan, US or Switzerland (for example).

It sort of depends on where you define the centre in politics. Against Western Europe, Mrs Thatcher would be to the right of centre. Against averaged major global economies, she clearly would be to the left of centre. As we're competing globally, it's necessary to look far beyond "Old Europe".

[Marsilius]

But don't you think that David Miliband is really hot?

Well there certainly is in America!

That has been going on here since the Depression (the Great one, not the current one).

Actually the idea was not really that bad. Too large a surplus of agricultural products would depress the market to the point that all farmers would loose money. So the government pays to take some land out of production. Prices stay high and the farmer gets an income even though not all his land is in production.

That was the model 70 years ago. Now many people have learned to "game the system" and the whole thing is under review here.