Topic: Agriculture can save your country from recession - page 3. (Read 1163 times)

         For those countries that do not have large areas, there is an option to use hydroponic installations. Today, this is no longer a rarity. There would be a desire to do something similar with the authorities. The investment required is not that big. Especially when there is a lot of sunshine in the country. This simplifies things even more.
         Therefore, there is no need to shield those states that have small territories. All this is already fixable with current farming technologies.

I always keep saying that government should be the buyer for a good amount of money, then government can sell it for either lower or higher depending on the season, but they should always be the buyer. Wouldn't that work? No need to regulate or partially manage, no need to keep interrupting.

Just let them do whatever they want with a set price government would get, if they can find a buyer for higher then they can sell it for that person, but at least farmers would know what the worst case situation and they can work according to that. If they fail, then they fail and that means something, but that doesn't mean that we are not going to end up with anything different, it is going to be pretty much basically the same situation.

Right indeed. Agribusiness has definitely a lot of advantage not only for the family that own it but even to those neighborhood that can also benefit it in times of huge production. While this can be a perfect business for a country not to fall from recession, but I just think this is still not enough. My country is certainly in agribusiness but still, as much as I can say, it’s still close to its economy downfall.

It wasn't that much to see with you but look, people never survive without farming. And even we know that it only contributed less to our economy but this also plays some key roles in saving many people from recession. In fact, many countries are investing and putting much allocation on agriculture as they know that it helps a lot to them. Of course, those who have no areas to use It might not be appreciated by other countries, but for a country that has a huge land area, it can be considered as their great asset to grow their economy.

True, agriculture is very important because the agricultural sector is a sector that supports the lives of all human beings. So every country should continue to develop this sector. Because agriculture also continues to contribute to the provision of functional food, agriculture continues to encourage a good level of health so that it can increase the country's productivity. And of course this sector can provide benefits for economic development, increase the income level of a country, and people's living standards increase as a result the level of state income so that people's living standards increase.

So, a country's policies need to advance agriculture, the government must be able to create agricultural product development so that it can create a higher surplus of empowerment. Apart from that there should be Agricultural Extension from the government, because in my opinion this is the right step in increasing agricultural production. So that farmers can prosper, the government really needs to pay serious attention. the point is the government's alignment with farmers, because agriculture is a source of food.

State intervention in agribusiness isn't the most popular topic for casual chit-chat, is it? The thing is, can we afford to completely rule out the role of government in ensuring food security? Look, I get it. Too much meddling from the government can stifle private businesses. But what happens when crisis strikes? Droughts, floods, pests... These aren't things the average farmer or private business can tackle solo. Yeah, sure, there's a risk of dependency on government support, but isn't there also a risk of total collapse without it? A balanced approach seems more sensible, where government plays a role but doesn't overshadow private enterprise. There's a middle ground in there somewhere, right?

I see your intention is good and I just hope you’ll achieve that in due time. However, having an agri business will certainly take a lot of your patience and understanding before you can say that your business becomes productive and profitable. And definitely, a lot of expenses as well so you can ensure it’s growth and it’s productivity in the making. So it can save one country from recession, but Im not certain how long it’ll last.

Countries that stopped investing in the economy made the worst decision because agriculture is what keeps the economy moving. Agriculture plays the most important role in maintaining the economic condition of a country. All the countries that give much importance to agriculture, meet their needs and export their agricultural products to different countries of the world. Countries that are not dependent on agriculture are usually directly dependent on other countries. If due to dependence on another country, diplomatic relations with that country deteriorate or import and export stop due to some other problem, think how bad the situation can be for a country dependent on another country. Government of every country should give utmost importance to farmers and agriculture.

You are now talking not about support from the state, but about full-fledged influence on agribusiness.
On the one hand, I agree with you - in countries where there is a real problem of growing and providing the local population with food, state regulation and partial management, this is a necessary measure.
I also consider as an acceptable option - closer interaction with private agricultural companies, in crisis situations, when a private business has force majeure circumstances caused by external factors (war, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, ...), and these agricultural companies cannot "survive" on their own ".
In all other cases, the influence of the state, as a rule, negatively affects business (and we are talking about private agribusiness).

I don't understand how? Agriculture is the lowest when it comes to contribution to the GDP. Also it's not that productive based on the land as well. I mean the percentage yield which manufacturing or service could provide on the same land will be much more than farming. Also for farming to make money you need to have growth in demand of agro products which also I don't see happening anytime soon. So please care to explain how exactly economically this could happen?

The truth is bitter and that is exactly what you have summarise in some paragraph and evidence validated everything you discuss but the question that will remain unanswered is that how many people will be willing to farm, majority of urban people are more focus on a developed business and what they can do to remain within their county, they don't want to go to where there is land and develop city are congested with limited available spaces that even the human are still fighting to occupied and live comfortably, they don't want to come home.

Advance farming is great path to develop a country and individuality even financial statuses but this can be  done where there is abundant land( both corps and animals) and this is available in rural areas but the people living in those areas don't even have the knowledge about advanced farming or the resources to do this, if they have the resources they wouldn't be suffering on the local ways of farming that doesn't yield much at the end of the day.

The government is trying with rural areas but in my country, it's just as if they don't receive it because of the increase in corruption, nepotism and cheating, distribution doesn't go much to people that really need this resources to even farm and this is why the country suffers from hunger and increase in price of goods because of high demand and low supply.

I certainly agree. Agriculture is one of the most important sector of our economy but they get the least support from the government. They have been seeking help from the government since then but the government are even taking advantage of our farmers buying their agriculture products at the very unreasonable price and huge businesses would sell them for a very high price while others are importing.
If the agriculture sector is getting enough support from the government, they can actually save the economy in the future and it will also lessen the suffering of the poorest of the poor sector who are struggling to survive because of lack of food.
If leaders could only value the effort and hardwork of farmers and agriculturist, I don't think famine would still be a big problem in the future.

That's why the government's presence is very important and can help farmers in the process of planting and harvesting. The government provides subsidized fertilizers, agricultural tools that are easily accessible and ensures agricultural needs at much more stable prices, so that farmers do not find it difficult to ensure the needs needed from planting to harvest. The presence of the government is no less important in managing crop yields from farmers through related agencies that facilitate the agricultural sector, because the stability of goods has related agencies that control it and that is where the government's presence is very important.

This is to maintain price stability in the market because if the crops are purchased by unofficial distributors, they will hoard these agricultural resources, causing scarcity and causing prices to rise uncontrollably. This is where problems arise and can eventually lead to conditions of inflation and recession because domestic products are unstable and scarcity is caused by those who hoard agricultural produce.

The presence of the government is very important to ensure food security in every country, the government has access to the districts through related agencies and they must be able to function this to ensure that food sources are available in the market. The concept must be properly facilitated with regard to output and input, I also do not agree if the presence of the government is only as a provider of capital, but not to oversee the harvest process because if this is done the farmers will never be independent at any time.

That applies to people who don't have stable finances and government programs are indeed in facilities for people like this. So not all groups get assistance from the government and they have criteria that must be prioritized for assistance.

Looks like India has banned rice exports, sparking fears of a global shortage: https://news.sky.com/story/some-will-go-hungry-some-will-starve-global-rice-shortages-feared-after-india-bans-exports-12925097

India's a large exporter of food so they're reducing their own revenue by cutting exports. There's not a lot of money to be made in food because of how easy it is to grow with modern technology, but when large exporters start controlling the market by restricting output, demand goes up.

Setting the economics aside, it's projected this will cause famine.

Right? However, the funny thing is that some primarily agricultural countries are lacking the proper management and help from their governments to ensure that they are well taken care of. The budget for the agriculture sector from these countries are relatively lower compared to other sectors that I think are far less important. It's ironic how these countries which should be the ones to export agricultural products are now demanding for imports from other countries today.

Pretty dumb move.... Food, especially in today's world, where regular droughts, floods, climate change, etc. events have a negative impact on crop yields, and primarily agricultural products for the population. Everyone knows it, everyone understands it, and accordingly, the refusal of agribusiness is the way to total dependence on external suppliers. And this means either high prices or manipulation of consumers.

Many countries without fertile land, or having them in limited amounts, make maximum efforts to develop the agricultural sector.

In near past many countries stopped investing into agriculture businesses. But I think they started to realize how bad it can turn out to be. When your economy gets bad agriculture will save your people from hunger. It will give nice boost to your overall local markets too. Individual agriculture businesses help people to not waste money on absurdly experience fruit/vegetable prices too. And when you produce something yourself it will definitely taste better.

Yes, I apologize, I may have missed the main point of the thread.
But I wanted to say that it's not very right to wait for a solution only from the state. The state in a difficult situation really should provide support. But the population should be active and motivated to take an active part.
I just observed a couple of stories when people for some reason expected that the state will give them money, give them equipment, give them workers, in case of problems will pay everything including debts, and they will just own the business and get income Of course the picture is exaggerated, but roughly so
In any case - I wish everyone success, government support and building a quality business !

Governments in every country should look at this side of the farmers, that is, the price of unhusked rice is relatively stable while the prices of agricultural materials such as fertilizers, agricultural equipment, and especially agricultural machinery tend to increase from time to time. And the prices of other commodities besides agriculture, both goods, and services, tend to increase far beyond the increase in agricultural production.

So to maintain food security in a country, the Government needs to study more deeply what treatment is most correct and suitable for farmers, including subsidies and guarantees for health and education for children and their families. So that our farmers can be proud and comfortable working as farmers. If this is not the case, the profession of a farmer will be abandoned little by little because they will realize that they will not develop if they continue to work as a farmer. This will have a very significant impact on a country's food security. And this is not something that can be underestimated.

This should be the most prioritized by every country to save from recession. After all, the agricultural sector is what makes all of us able to live. But the problem now is that in my country there are very few young people who want to become farmers, due to limited land, and uncertain income, they prefer to be YouTubers, TikTok, and miners, selling online is more promising. This is because the government in my country does not fully care about the agricultural sector, farmers' lives are increasingly marginalized due to fertilizer subsidies that continue to be reduced while the prices of agricultural commodities are dropping, especially during the harvest season.

That's right, what you're saying I think the OP is just conveying a general opinion. Possible. But the advice you convey to your child is very educational. Yes. If we as the people, if you want to vote, don't vote like that. and if you become a leader, don't image much. (sorry I don't talk about politics here) I'm just conveying the impact if we as the people make the wrong choice.