I would suggest that it might be to do with what comes out their rear ends, things like dung beetles and flies.
That would be another idea for the support under a lathe, already suggested are conveyor belt rubber and horse mating but vegan cheese is another option.
Of course the cows aren’t out in the fields all year round it destroys the fields. That’s why hay, haylage and silage are a staple part of the cows winter diet. That has been the case since before Constable painted the Haywain (high sided trailer for hay) crossing the river. Of course it’s more industrial today but the concept of cows grazing in meadows all year round has never been a fact of farming.Hmm ... to say that beef cattle are fed on grass seems to conjure up the idyll of sunny meadows full of diverse plants and teeming with insects. However, the reality can be very different.
In this part of the world they practice a form of remote-grazing. The cattle are not taken to the fields, so much as the grass is taken to the cattle. The cycle runs along the lines of, first applying weed killer, then ploughing, harrowing and applying fertilizer, followed by seeding. As the grass grows selective weed killers are used which ensures that the grass, and only the grass, grows, Several cuts are taken off the field as the season proceeds followed by the application of more fertilizer. The crop can be in the form of silage, haylage , or hay. Every year a certain percentage is again re seeded..
With silage, whole fleets of tractors and high-sided trailers are used to collect and ferry the cargo, in journeys of several miles. This work is usually undertaken by contractors.
The cattle are kept under cover in winter, and restricted to a few home fields in the summer.. . They are of course grass-fed, but not as we would like to think.
If they bought less we could tax them more. Maybe just take top rates back to 60% as it was under Thatcher.
Less VAT and more income tax would be fairer. And higher rates on unearned income.
Not according to Starmer - he's going for growth and hence more tax take.
Yep. Lower tax and higher benefits at the poor end helps boost economy as it gets spent quickly (and not all booze and ****!). At the top end it gets frittered away on luxuries or stashed off shore etc. They don't need it and what goes around comes around.
And of course animal feed of every sort means a huge increase in arable land for hay, turnips, beans etc.
Apologies, if I have caused any confusion here. I was simply pointing out that cattle are less frequently taken to the fields to graze, but that they are now kept mostly under cover and the grass is brought to them. The best they can hope is to be let out into a field adjacent to their housing during the daylight hours.
One has to ask the question as to whether a vegetarian diet is applicable, or indeed desirable across the globe. I think the Inuit would struggle to grow anything. Hence their - far from vegetarian - traditional diet.
Your pre-conceived biases are showing.
The way things are warming up there'll potatoes growing on Baffin Island in no time!
There'll be enough spare capacity further east to supply darkest Wales, which in the meantime could be reforested and re peated, to sequester carbon.
The good old british spud could become non viable to grow in the uk having watched a program where a farmer was saying that for decades they have ground spuds but now it is just to wet and they rot. Maybe paddy fields and make rice our staple.
You mean the facts?
Quite the opposite. Given more money and they can afford better quality and benefit the UK economy instead of buying cheap stuff from abroad, or from poorly paid workers here.
It isn't though is it? By definition they are hanging on to it instead of spending it.
They don't though do they? That's the whole problem - wealth doesn't trickle down it goes up and stays there.
No it's the way to make the economy work. It isn't a compromise at all it's a basis requirement. There is no alternative.
meeting the short term needs of the poorer is in the longer term to the benefit of society
Both what? We need money to circulate, to drive the economic machine, whether its wages or investment.
The link you provided identifies two sets of rules for the game:
Surely exactly the opposite "The anti-monopolist rules reward all players during wealth creation,"
With the amount of rain we get these days that might be a good idea.
Half of those aren’t ingredients, they’re elements.
Monopoly is a game based on luck. The throwing of a dice is an outcome that nobody can control.
What usually happens with the board game is that any advantage gained, whether by luck or judgment, tends to grow, until the game becomes so unbalanced that others go "bankrupt" as property accumulates in fewer and fewer hands.
Indeed, that'a very true; bit like life, really. We all start with nothing and, based on luck, like where you're born, and judgement, like which investment to make, whether it's in a financial one or a direction in life, will depend your outcome.
That's quite enough philosophy for a weekday.
