|
|
Post by thirsty on Aug 21, 2011 22:27:36 GMT -5
I almost feel sorry for the BAU crowd, frick is this gonna be a lousy century for them. Can't help but notice all them old pre 30's farmhouses out in the sticks were fair sized, clad in real brick and had interior finishes like I only see in some of the high end stuff I get into.
|
|
|
|
Post by glowplug on Aug 21, 2011 22:29:16 GMT -5
Back in my college days, The Population Bomb was pretty much required reading. The author basically said we'd be in deep shxt overpopulation by the 1980s or sumtin'.
Well here we are. Oh way back then the scientists were predicting an Ice Age. Closest thing anyone has seen to an Ice Age is sHrillary Clinton's bedroom. Ain't no global warming either.
Meanwhile crop yields have come up over the years. We've gotten better with no-till, min-till, etc. Oh dagnabbit, I'm too optimistic to post in the Doom Thread now.
|
|
|
|
Post by looter on Aug 21, 2011 22:56:54 GMT -5
What do you fellas think about the Fed's Dual Mandate? Who's idea was that anyway? What do pols say about it? Is there any controversy at all about a Dual Mandate? Moreover, is it even possible?
How is it possible for educated men to publicly state on TV that they know just what to do with monetary policy to both fight inflation and create full employment? How does the academic crowd accept this? What happened that made this concept as mainstream as Sunday football?
Has anybody read "Animal Farm" lately? Ever feel like the goat in that novel?
|
|
|
|
Post by Grainbelt on Aug 22, 2011 7:02:25 GMT -5
Dead on again Looter!
It is fairly easy for the Federal Reserve Bank to have control over inflation rates. It is virtually impossible for them to have any effect what so ever on employment. The artificial overnight lending rate and the amount of money in supply doesn't determine employment rates. Especially when other parts of the Federal Government are determining that there is a minimum amount that workers can be paid and that the rate one can collect to not work is a better deal than if one elects to work at the minimum.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandbox on Aug 22, 2011 8:47:14 GMT -5
Back in the day folks used Ag discussion boards to promote their own conviction. For example, guys used to talk up the virtue of their position. Somebody on the other side would take the opposite side and folks would duke it out. A poster's goal was to talk themselves into sticking with their position regardless of short term price movement. It takes CONVICTION to hang onto a trade in the face of a few backward days. In today's market environment, the moving parts got bigger, to the point a person doesn't have much conviction. Regardless of how rich you are, too much conviction will roast ya. So it's harder than ever to talk yourself, let alone somebody else, into a given bias. Nothing would surprise anybody anymore. Euro debt problems, Arab uprisings, Nuke plant shutdowns etc. The Fed was always a wild card, but today its a wild-as-frick-card. Who knows what inventions Bernanke is gonna come up with next? Look at the new Fed-speak that came about in recent times, "Agrogator Bank, QE, Nationailation of entire industries, what will tomorrow's headlines bring? This is the human population bumping up against resource constraints. I don't see the population bomb receding. Welcome to the new normal. Marketing interests me. The only problem is I try not to post on a topic unless I have just a little comprehension of the topic. As a result I don't post much. Lots of issues on my mind lately. The recipie for making money in the farming game for decades was go into debt as deep as you can, soak up the subsidies to make payments and allow the inflation of the non-depreciating assets to dissolve the debt and make you a wealthy man. Little hiccup in that model in the 80s that folks still moan about. The question currently is: is that model now broken? My gut reaction is yes but trying to take into account current monetary policy..... hmmmm... Errrr, wait, do we have a monetary policy? Or just a bunch of spooked econo-techno-dorks who are convinced they can keep this $&(^ing thing from crashing on their watch?  I have now far exceeded my level of comprehension. Back to regular programming. |
|
|
|
Post by Grainbelt on Aug 22, 2011 11:09:01 GMT -5
Tomorrow AM I'm gonna finish pricing up to 75% of Pa's APH on corn/beans. (Already 40% there) Here's why, we have about 220% of his APH growing in each acre, so barring a hail storm (loads of ins on that) or a freak frost, its a party of a year finally. Our ave cost of production is looking like $2.83/bu on corn and $7.40 on beans. It was $4.11 on his HRW because we were lucky. We are gonna hang onto half of the wheat... prolly for a long time. I'm biased to the long side on corn/beans, but reckon taking some price risk off the table makes sense. Tomorrow AM we could wake up to a coordinated subway bomb in 5 major cities. As you've preached, the future is by definition, unknowable. In 40 years of farming, its never rained this much on the old man's place, and prices were never this high. We are looking at $1,000/acre gross income on corn this year on land that sold 4 years ago for $250/acre. The plan is to roll the profits into salt. That way we can make pemmican out of the cow herd once the collapse hits. Well Outback, did you pull the trigger near the open? Calling tops and bottoms is a fools game but man I will be shocked, if you did sell, that you didn't just hit the upper 10% of the market in the near term. Even with baked in supply reductions, demand desturction will limit just how high prices can go. Especially given the macro headwinds facing all markets. Grainbelt |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Aug 22, 2011 14:05:37 GMT -5
Tomorrow AM I'm gonna finish pricing up to 75% of Pa's APH on corn/beans. (Already 40% there) Here's why, we have about 220% of his APH growing in each acre, so barring a hail storm (loads of ins on that) or a freak frost, its a party of a year finally. Our ave cost of production is looking like $2.83/bu on corn and $7.40 on beans. It was $4.11 on his HRW because we were lucky. We are gonna hang onto half of the wheat... prolly for a long time. I'm biased to the long side on corn/beans, but reckon taking some price risk off the table makes sense. Tomorrow AM we could wake up to a coordinated subway bomb in 5 major cities. As you've preached, the future is by definition, unknowable. In 40 years of farming, its never rained this much on the old man's place, and prices were never this high. We are looking at $1,000/acre gross income on corn this year on land that sold 4 years ago for $250/acre. The plan is to roll the profits into salt. That way we can make pemmican out of the cow herd once the collapse hits. Well Outback, did you pull the trigger near the open? Calling tops and bottoms is a fools game but man I will be shocked, if you did sell, that you didn't just hit the upper 10% of the market in the near term. Even with baked in supply reductions, demand desturction will limit just how high prices can go. Especially given the macro headwinds facing all markets. Grainbelt Yup. Booked the corn for $7 and the beans for $14 all straight off the combine. I understand that isn't how you max revenue, but seeing as how we never anticipate having a crop in the first place, storage is sorta cocky. |
|
|
|
Post by Farmerkuk on Aug 22, 2011 14:20:47 GMT -5
$7.00 of combine pretty good for SD!
What was the basis?
|
|
|
|
Post by looter on Aug 22, 2011 15:23:43 GMT -5
$7.00 of combine pretty good for SD! What was the basis? -60 on corn and -90 on beans. Our area has a ridiculous fall crop on the way. I don't see basis getting better at harvest. How about your area? |
|
|
|
Post by Farmerkuk on Aug 22, 2011 15:44:06 GMT -5
-50 new crop corn
no soybeans all edibles and it has it's own market that is run by the Kelley family
|
|
