Nice video explaining Farmer bill

[MiryalgudaMaruthiRao]

[Sachin200]

On 2/9/2021 at 6:52 PM, Ellen said:

I would support farm bill if the government first brought in reforms to agricultural practices and then gone ahead with market reforms. Reforms ante better technology, better storage, better yield mechanisms and level playing field for all farmers: Large and small and marginal. Without that seedha market reforms is unpractical as the rich will only get richer types laga. These bills wont hit all the farmers equally. Some benefit...while many will lose. 

Actually privatization can bring innovation or latest technology through investment . But government might not invest on agriculture since it will not being immediate profits 

Raghuram rajan mentioned similar things around 2014 . 

[RSUCHOU]

On 2/10/2021 at 7:22 AM, Ellen said:

I would support farm bill if the government first brought in reforms to agricultural practices and then gone ahead with market reforms. Reforms ante better technology, better storage, better yield mechanisms and level playing field for all farmers: Large and small and marginal. Without that seedha market reforms is unpractical as the rich will only get richer types laga. These bills wont hit all the farmers equally. Some benefit...while many will lose. 

Agri reforms have multiple cogs like access to the market, Storage facilities, food processing units, lesser middlemen. Government cannot invest in the infrastructure at the same pace as the requirement. Hence, by opening up the market, you are allowing the infrastructure to grow at the pace required by using private money. Just like PPP in building Airports/Roads etc. In India, most of the agriculture is done by people with lesser land holdings. For example in most of the villages in South and other states like Bihar, Maharastra etc, the people that own land lesser than 2 acres is more than 95% of the land owners. So, investing in technology like drip irrigation or buying tractors and food processing unit establishment cannot be done. In the current setup, with the Mandi structure, the middlemen gangup on the farmers and steal their produce at such a cheap price that, farming becomes economically unviable. For example, my village is less than 100 KMs from Bangalore. The price of say tomato is never less than 5 rs per KG most of the year, the middlemen never give more than 2rs per kilo. They do not even let the farmers go out and sell. Also, the farmers cannot invest in technologies like drip irrigation etc as they cost around 50K per acre. When their entire income is less than the cost they spent, they get into a vicious debt cycle. They cannot afford to buy machinery like tractors etc as well as their volumes do not warrant or support that kind of an expenditure. 

One another problem with irrigation is that the farmers are not educated on the newer technologies and are never given access to the market demands. So, what in turn happens is that they go on producing according to the age old mindsets they inherited. For example, my village is in a drought prone zone. We get water once in a while from the dams. The moment we get water, everyone in the village goes for paddy cultivation. They do not even consider growing something like Aloevera that grows abundantly even if we do not cultivate it. What is needed for us is a processing unit. So, the intention of letting private entities to enter into farming is a welcome change. Also, the idea of making India an open market is a welcome change as well.

Now coming to why there is opposition if the farm bills are so very good. First of all, the opposition is primarily centered from the Jatt belt of Haryana, Punjab. Punjab (Meaning land of 5 rivers) was a water abundant fertile state. During the Second world war and the latter famine, there was an acute shortage of Wheat/Paddy. So, the government got into regulating the produce and started deciding a MSP so that they ensure the supply and start filling their godowns with grain for an eventuality. Also, Average land size in Punjab, Haryana and borders of UP belt was more than 7 acres. This meant people could employ machinery like tractors, motors etc to maximize the produce. This worked well until the bad effects of single crop farming kicked in. Due to no crop change, the quantity of produce and quality of produce has gone down completely, taking along with it, the fertility of the land and giving in a new problem called, water scarcity. As an icing on the cake, they also had to dispose of all the stubble that comes in after Wheat and rice are harvested. To easily get rid of the stubble, the farmers started burning the stubble, adding to the pollution. So, when the government proposed the farm bills, they also vehemently prodded the people to look away from what has been their inherited knowledge to get to more modern farming models and investing in commercial crops etc.

The farmers are stubborn and are being mislead by the Mandi owners that stand to lose in this whole equation. While I can go on a little further into explaining this problem, I am not sure, if that would interest you. In short, what I would say is, these bills are one of the best reforms to have been made by this government. But, being hot headed as they are, they just squandered an opportunity to make impact.

[Sachin200]

@RSUCHOU  These are other issues 

1. The first provision relates to Section 6, which exempts transactions done outside the physical premises of APMC (agricultural produce market committee) mandis from any “market fee or cess or levy” imposed by state governments. Farm unions claim it leads to an unlevel playing field between the APMC mandis and private collection centres or markets created under the new Act.

2. The second amendment to the Act could be to Section 15. Under it, disputes arising out of transactions in the alternative markets cannot be entertained in regular civil courts. Instead, these have to be compulsorily referred to conciliation boards and appellate authorities appointed by the local sub-divisional magistrates (SDM) and district collectors concerned. Their orders would have the “force of the decree of a civil court”. Section 15 states that “no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, the cognizance of which can be taken and disposed of” by these authorities.

Farm unions have interpreted the bar of jurisdiction of civil courts as denial of justice. The SDMs and district collectors aren’t independent like regular courts. Being part of the government system, they are more likely to take the side of big corporate buyers, they allege.

3. Third amendment could possibly be to Section 4, which requires any trader buying or selling in an alternative market to only have an income tax permanent account number (PAN) “or such other document as may be notified by the Central government”. The unions say that this very limited requirement allows room for fly-by-night operators, who will not pay farmers. This is unlike the traders licensed by APMC mandis, who cannot afford to default. If farmers don’t receive payment for their produce, they can now approach the APMC authorities, who may cancel the licences of such traders and even encash the bank guarantees submitted by them.

“We wanted to make law simple. But if farmers feel that anyone can easily procure a PAN card today and there should be additional protection through registration of traders, the government can consider that as well,” the Minister added

 

[RSUCHOU]

On 2/10/2021 at 5:02 AM, Telugodura456 said:

 

Stupid simplification. MSP is at the most for not more than 23 products. The MSP is what is actually  letting people to produce more and more of stuff that is not necessary. 

[RSUCHOU]

16 minutes ago, Sachin200 said:

@RSUCHOU  These are other issues 

1. The first provision relates to Section 6, which exempts transactions done outside the physical premises of APMC (agricultural produce market committee) mandis from any “market fee or cess or levy” imposed by state governments. Farm unions claim it leads to an unlevel playing field between the APMC mandis and private collection centres or markets created under the new Act.

2. The second amendment to the Act could be to Section 15. Under it, disputes arising out of transactions in the alternative markets cannot be entertained in regular civil courts. Instead, these have to be compulsorily referred to conciliation boards and appellate authorities appointed by the local sub-divisional magistrates (SDM) and district collectors concerned. Their orders would have the “force of the decree of a civil court”. Section 15 states that “no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, the cognizance of which can be taken and disposed of” by these authorities.

Farm unions have interpreted the bar of jurisdiction of civil courts as denial of justice. The SDMs and district collectors aren’t independent like regular courts. Being part of the government system, they are more likely to take the side of big corporate buyers, they allege.

3. Third amendment could possibly be to Section 4, which requires any trader buying or selling in an alternative market to only have an income tax permanent account number (PAN) “or such other document as may be notified by the Central government”. The unions say that this very limited requirement allows room for fly-by-night operators, who will not pay farmers. This is unlike the traders licensed by APMC mandis, who cannot afford to default. If farmers don’t receive payment for their produce, they can now approach the APMC authorities, who may cancel the licences of such traders and even encash the bank guarantees submitted by them.

“We wanted to make law simple. But if farmers feel that anyone can easily procure a PAN card today and there should be additional protection through registration of traders, the government can consider that as well,” the Minister added

 

Private does not mean corporate. Do you think Ambani and Adani will fight and procure all the produce. Pepsico is the largest procurer of Potatoes in India. Pepsico lost to the farmers when it disputed the use of potatoes patented by them. Corrections to the bill, can definitely be discussed based on points like above. Repealing them, should not be on the table.

[Sachin200]

28 minutes ago, RSUCHOU said:

Private does not mean corporate. Do you think Ambani and Adani will fight and procure all the produce. Pepsico is the largest procurer of Potatoes in India. Pepsico lost to the farmers when it disputed the use of potatoes patented by them. Corrections to the bill, can definitely be discussed based on points like above. Repealing them, should not be on the table.

JP mentioned the same thing . He try to explain inflation of onions vs potatoes too 

 

 

BjP should assure that deflation of price  will not happen from corporate entities through price regulations  . But section 15 is another conflict of interest , cannot be entertained in civil courts 

[RSUCHOU]

39 minutes ago, Sachin200 said:

JP mentioned the same thing . He try to explain inflation of onions vs potatoes too 

 

 

BjP should assure that deflation of price  will not happen from corporate entities through price regulations  . But section 15 is another conflict of interest , cannot be entertained in civil courts 

Agree! Incidentally I had posted the exact same video on one of the threads on farm bills a little while ago. Far too much noise from an entitled community.

[neethy]

the videos shared reflects the mis-information and misguided understanding. 

MSP is there, it was never a debate, it was there from the beginning.

All khangress ecosystem, politicians are going to loose their power  and manipulation.

They come to power based on promises to farmers - now they cannot do that any more.

This is the naked truth behind the behind the wall support of all parties, regional parties -

చస్తున్నారు, ఏడుస్తున్నారు .. గిల గిల కొట్టుకుంటున్నారు .....

[Mirage]

@RSUCHOU @Sachin200 Good points. The reforms were waiting to happen for decades but nobody likes to disturb the status quo. The now universally lauded 1991 economic reforms faced a severe and unwarranted backlash back then. 

[sage]

watch this - from 15 mins if dont have patience

 

[Ellen]

6 hours ago, RSUCHOU said:

Agri reforms have multiple cogs like access to the market, Storage facilities, food processing units, lesser middlemen. Government cannot invest in the infrastructure at the same pace as the requirement. Hence, by opening up the market, you are allowing the infrastructure to grow at the pace required by using private money. Just like PPP in building Airports/Roads etc. In India, most of the agriculture is done by people with lesser land holdings. For example in most of the villages in South and other states like Bihar, Maharastra etc, the people that own land lesser than 2 acres is more than 95% of the land owners. So, investing in technology like drip irrigation or buying tractors and food processing unit establishment cannot be done. In the current setup, with the Mandi structure, the middlemen gangup on the farmers and steal their produce at such a cheap price that, farming becomes economically unviable. For example, my village is less than 100 KMs from Bangalore. The price of say tomato is never less than 5 rs per KG most of the year, the middlemen never give more than 2rs per kilo. They do not even let the farmers go out and sell. Also, the farmers cannot invest in technologies like drip irrigation etc as they cost around 50K per acre. When their entire income is less than the cost they spent, they get into a vicious debt cycle. They cannot afford to buy machinery like tractors etc as well as their volumes do not warrant or support that kind of an expenditure. 

One another problem with irrigation is that the farmers are not educated on the newer technologies and are never given access to the market demands. So, what in turn happens is that they go on producing according to the age old mindsets they inherited. For example, my village is in a drought prone zone. We get water once in a while from the dams. The moment we get water, everyone in the village goes for paddy cultivation. They do not even consider growing something like Aloevera that grows abundantly even if we do not cultivate it. What is needed for us is a processing unit. So, the intention of letting private entities to enter into farming is a welcome change. Also, the idea of making India an open market is a welcome change as well.

Now coming to why there is opposition if the farm bills are so very good. First of all, the opposition is primarily centered from the Jatt belt of Haryana, Punjab. Punjab (Meaning land of 5 rivers) was a water abundant fertile state. During the Second world war and the latter famine, there was an acute shortage of Wheat/Paddy. So, the government got into regulating the produce and started deciding a MSP so that they ensure the supply and start filling their godowns with grain for an eventuality. Also, Average land size in Punjab, Haryana and borders of UP belt was more than 7 acres. This meant people could employ machinery like tractors, motors etc to maximize the produce. This worked well until the bad effects of single crop farming kicked in. Due to no crop change, the quantity of produce and quality of produce has gone down completely, taking along with it, the fertility of the land and giving in a new problem called, water scarcity. As an icing on the cake, they also had to dispose of all the stubble that comes in after Wheat and rice are harvested. To easily get rid of the stubble, the farmers started burning the stubble, adding to the pollution. So, when the government proposed the farm bills, they also vehemently prodded the people to look away from what has been their inherited knowledge to get to more modern farming models and investing in commercial crops etc.

The farmers are stubborn and are being mislead by the Mandi owners that stand to lose in this whole equation. While I can go on a little further into explaining this problem, I am not sure, if that would interest you. In short, what I would say is, these bills are one of the best reforms to have been made by this government. But, being hot headed as they are, they just squandered an opportunity to make impact.

While I agree with all your points, I still fail to understand how exactly these small land owners will benefit on an individual basis. Like you said, obviously governement can't go extra mile to provide the necessary technology for each individual with less than 2 acres of farm land. I am unable to comprehend how that can be changed with these laws...Could you elaborate on that? 

[Dosakai]

3 minutes ago, Ellen said:

While I agree with all your points, I still fail to understand how exactly these small land owners will benefit on an individual basis. Like you said, obviously governement can't go extra mile to provide the necessary technology for each individual with less than 2 acres of farm land. I am unable to comprehend how that can be changed with these laws...Could you elaborate on that? 

Haha.. Hope he leaves more line breaks in his response. 

[NiranjanGaaru]

Dumbos maa modi ni edriste matashe ani @Hydrockersbro chepamanadu

[Dosakai]

6 minutes ago, NiranjanGaaru said:

Dumbos maa modi ni edriste matashe ani @Hydrockersbro chepaman

Ellen adigina simple quechen ki answer cheyy mundhu. 

Taravatha sooddaam.