I worry about small farmers, as they're the ones that will lose business. They're the ones that actually care for the environment where big factory farms just don't.
Don't know what small farmers youre talking about, unless its organic farmers. There are small farmers all around me, and they've been spreading slurry hours before forecasted storm, so it'll all have run off into the rivers by now. The same farmers ignore the ban on cutting trees during nesting season every year, and they've all drained what little wet ground was left to turn it into more monoculture pasture. There are environmentally conscious farmers, but I dont see the size of the farm making any difference to it.
Ive noticed the narrative lately of big farmers being cold hearted industrialists that pollute our rivers and destroy our biodiversity, while the small farmer is just honest, little house on the prairie types, who respect the countryside. Complete bullshit, they'd both level whatever scrap of woodland they have on their land if they reckoned it would earn them a few more quid, without a second thought
Its fairly patronsing to assume im ignorant of where food comes from. I dont eat beef or dairy, so its a bit of a mute point. My dinner is vegetarian, and while large scale horticulture is far from perfect, the environmental impact of growing veg is far lower than rearing cattle.
Well that explains a lot. I forgot I was on reddit for a second...
the environmental impact of growing veg is far lower than rearing cattle
Not too sure about that. You world-savers seem to forget how many exploited farmers, planes, boats and dead bees it takes to get your so called "environmentally friendly" food on your plate.
Does it? Im sure if I said I was tucking into a stake for dinner, you'd be telling me im a hypocrite. Ya can't win
Not too sure about that
Are ya not? By every metric, beef and dairy is the least efficient form of agriculture there is. That not opinion, its fact. The amount of land required, fertiliser required, the amount of GHG emissions per kilo produced, the amount of water required per kilo produced, cattle come out way ahead of any other type of food. Even when transport emissions are taken into account, no grain or vegetable comes anywhere close. Eat whatever you want, I don't give a fuck, but dont be deluding yourself.
Do you realise how much less food there would be in the world (that already doesn't have enough food) if we got rid of beef and dairy "for the environment".
Do me a favour and learn to spell as well, before you go lecturing others.
Do you realise how much less food there would be in the world (that already doesn't have enough food)
Categorically incorrect, there is not a shortage of food globally. We produce more than enough food to feed the population. The UN calculated that the food that is wasted annually would feed the amount of people malnourished, twice over. The issue is conflict, climate change and a general lack of will.
if we got rid of beef and dairy "for the environment."
Beef and dairy are, from a global perspective, luxury items, far out of reach of the average person in a poor country struggling with food poverty. So no, the beef and dairy sector isnt tackling world hunger, like you seem to think it is.
Cattle farming is incredibly resource heavy. If you were really worried about feeding people, you should convert pasture to arrable land, and you could produce more food on less than quarter of the land.
So everything you said is factually incorrect. I'm glad I was able to clear it up for you, though.👍
Stop being chronically online. People like you need to go out into the real world and see how things actually work. How many jobs do you think agriculture provides here? Harder to earn money there than the dole anyway... enjoy your kale.
I'm confused, at what point did I say that they didnt? Spreading slurry isnt the issue, the issue is the means in which its carried out. Every farmer around me, the majority have small herds, were out last night Spreading slurry, with a heavy downpour forecast for today. They also apply the slurry directly to the surface, meaning the whole lot is going to run off into the river. Its a completely irresponsible practice, but it continues to happen.
Admittedly I'm only basing my opinion on a particular organic farm I am familiar with up the country, but I know for a fact they invested a lot of money in injectors to reduce runoff and emissions from slurry spreading. And they also wouldnt be spreading before a fucking storm is due. Perhaps its just that the farm im familiar with is just run by environmentally conscious people, rather than the fact they farm organic.
The perception that all the environmental problems from agriculture in this country is due to the bigger farms is bollocks. They're all the same, biodiversity takes a back seat, as long as they think they can get away with it
Nice to know you’ve been out checking out every farmers field and slurry techniques.
I'm living in rural north Cork, im surrounded by small farms. I'm also involved in the environmental sector, so I pay more attention to what's going on around me than most would.
That aside, I'm not blind. There were tractors drawing and spreading slurry all day yesterday, they spread it on the field directly behind my house. Heavy rain forecast for early the following morning, but sure fuck it, spread it anyway, its only our waterways.
The Q score of the local river is atrocious, barely breaking a Q3 and its easy to see why. If you dont think agricultural practices are the driving factor for the poor state of our freshwater ecosystems, then youre delusional
The size of a farm doesn't make a difference when it comes to farmers caring about the environment, fairly well the same attitude among small and big farmers. I think big farmers tend to get more inspections though because they're more likely to be on schemes that require them.
Waiting until their vote means nothing, then striking a meaningless moral pose to appease a domestic audience, all the while keeping their European Commission puppet masters happy.
For a long time we didn't see the US as any sort of threat.
If the current mess has taught us anything, it should really be that over-reliance on any one partner is just creating a single point of failure - because reliable today does not guarantee reliable tomorrow, or in a year, or ten, or fifty.
That's aside from whether you see China as a threat/risk or not, which I think a lot of people wouldn't be so quick to agree on.
I'm not sure about that. China forgives tons of debt to developing African countries and provides interest-free loans. That's mutually beneficial for the recipients and for China.
Of course you can say it's in their interest because then China will have stronger trading partners in Africa to buy their commodities and so on. But it sounds like a win-win situation to me.
I think overall, while the deal has agricultural and environmental issues, the deal would be good for Ireland.
Dan O’Brien went through the numbers and stated that the deal has more positives than negatives for Irelands
Which is why agriculture is basically the only sector against it. It's the exports that are the benefits and they will benefit the 90% of people that aren't farmers.
No offense but Im explicitly saying I don't think vibes are a good enough reason. I'd like to see numbers or stats that show specific Irish industries benefiting.
I can understand how German car manufacturers benefit. I dont think it helps us.
We manufacture a lot of pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Access to that market would be a lifeline to the Irish economy when America is closing down more and more.
It’s not just vibes, billions do Euros will be saved and new markets will open up for Irish exporters. Pharma and medical devices will be winners, as well as smaller SME’s like our drinks industry. Also opens up services.
Agricultural inside the EU is heavily protected. I get the reasons for this, but Irelands agricultural sectors amounts for 1% of our GDP only.
Looking at the raw numbers, the Mercosur deal would be a positive but the farming lobby in Ireland is vocal and organised.
I mean you've just reiterated that agriculture is too small to listen to.
But agriculture is not important for economic reasons, its important for quality/security/environmental reasons and regardless evidently Mercursor cares a lot about it otherwise it wouldn't be front and centre, so its not nothing to them.
For Ireland specifically.... I've doubts it actually is beneficial. The only other physical goods we really care about is pharma, this may make it easier to sell in Mercursor..... but I've no idea what the competition is like, for some pharma goods you don't have a choice and just have to suck it up and pay the taxes. It seems mostly a deal for the automotive sector.
depends. Argentinian/Uruguayan beef is superior to irish, as the climate/land is vastly better, and at least in Uruguay, better regulated than the EU. Brazilian beef uses low quality breeds adapted to heat and is enviromentally compromised.
evidently Mercursor cares a lot about it otherwise
Because it's their only meaningful export. If all you have to sell is soybeans, beef and rice, you care a lot about soybeans, beef and rice.
Bottom line, Argentina and Uruguay have deep soils, warm year-round growing season, and rains ideal for Angus/Hereford mixes, while irish land turns to muck in winter.
Our GDP means very little. Big difference between multinational profits whisked through without paying tax, vs hundreds of thousands of jobs distributed throughout the country, spending money here and paying their taxes.
They must be delighted their votes means nothing and it will pass anyway so they can throw their hands up and say "shure it wasnt us, we voted no!"
Damned if they do damned if they don't.
The only reason they didn't vote for it is because they know their vote won't make a difference because its going to pass anyway
I worry about small farmers, as they're the ones that will lose business. They're the ones that actually care for the environment where big factory farms just don't.
I hope it doesn't pass.
Don't know what small farmers youre talking about, unless its organic farmers. There are small farmers all around me, and they've been spreading slurry hours before forecasted storm, so it'll all have run off into the rivers by now. The same farmers ignore the ban on cutting trees during nesting season every year, and they've all drained what little wet ground was left to turn it into more monoculture pasture. There are environmentally conscious farmers, but I dont see the size of the farm making any difference to it.
Ive noticed the narrative lately of big farmers being cold hearted industrialists that pollute our rivers and destroy our biodiversity, while the small farmer is just honest, little house on the prairie types, who respect the countryside. Complete bullshit, they'd both level whatever scrap of woodland they have on their land if they reckoned it would earn them a few more quid, without a second thought
Let’s not forget any herbicides/pesticides routinely sprayed across quite the many farm
Next time you're eating your dinner, ask yourself where the food came from..
Its fairly patronsing to assume im ignorant of where food comes from. I dont eat beef or dairy, so its a bit of a mute point. My dinner is vegetarian, and while large scale horticulture is far from perfect, the environmental impact of growing veg is far lower than rearing cattle.
Well that explains a lot. I forgot I was on reddit for a second...
Not too sure about that. You world-savers seem to forget how many exploited farmers, planes, boats and dead bees it takes to get your so called "environmentally friendly" food on your plate.
Does it? Im sure if I said I was tucking into a stake for dinner, you'd be telling me im a hypocrite. Ya can't win
Are ya not? By every metric, beef and dairy is the least efficient form of agriculture there is. That not opinion, its fact. The amount of land required, fertiliser required, the amount of GHG emissions per kilo produced, the amount of water required per kilo produced, cattle come out way ahead of any other type of food. Even when transport emissions are taken into account, no grain or vegetable comes anywhere close. Eat whatever you want, I don't give a fuck, but dont be deluding yourself.
Do you realise how much less food there would be in the world (that already doesn't have enough food) if we got rid of beef and dairy "for the environment".
Do me a favour and learn to spell as well, before you go lecturing others.
Categorically incorrect, there is not a shortage of food globally. We produce more than enough food to feed the population. The UN calculated that the food that is wasted annually would feed the amount of people malnourished, twice over. The issue is conflict, climate change and a general lack of will.
Beef and dairy are, from a global perspective, luxury items, far out of reach of the average person in a poor country struggling with food poverty. So no, the beef and dairy sector isnt tackling world hunger, like you seem to think it is.
Cattle farming is incredibly resource heavy. If you were really worried about feeding people, you should convert pasture to arrable land, and you could produce more food on less than quarter of the land.
So everything you said is factually incorrect. I'm glad I was able to clear it up for you, though.👍
Stop being chronically online. People like you need to go out into the real world and see how things actually work. How many jobs do you think agriculture provides here? Harder to earn money there than the dole anyway... enjoy your kale.
do organic farmers not spread slurry too?
you havent a clue what you're on about lad.
I'm confused, at what point did I say that they didnt? Spreading slurry isnt the issue, the issue is the means in which its carried out. Every farmer around me, the majority have small herds, were out last night Spreading slurry, with a heavy downpour forecast for today. They also apply the slurry directly to the surface, meaning the whole lot is going to run off into the river. Its a completely irresponsible practice, but it continues to happen.
Admittedly I'm only basing my opinion on a particular organic farm I am familiar with up the country, but I know for a fact they invested a lot of money in injectors to reduce runoff and emissions from slurry spreading. And they also wouldnt be spreading before a fucking storm is due. Perhaps its just that the farm im familiar with is just run by environmentally conscious people, rather than the fact they farm organic.
The perception that all the environmental problems from agriculture in this country is due to the bigger farms is bollocks. They're all the same, biodiversity takes a back seat, as long as they think they can get away with it
Nice to know you’ve been out checking out every farmers field and slurry techniques.
You’re talking utter shite the excuse the pun
I'm living in rural north Cork, im surrounded by small farms. I'm also involved in the environmental sector, so I pay more attention to what's going on around me than most would.
That aside, I'm not blind. There were tractors drawing and spreading slurry all day yesterday, they spread it on the field directly behind my house. Heavy rain forecast for early the following morning, but sure fuck it, spread it anyway, its only our waterways.
The Q score of the local river is atrocious, barely breaking a Q3 and its easy to see why. If you dont think agricultural practices are the driving factor for the poor state of our freshwater ecosystems, then youre delusional
The size of a farm doesn't make a difference when it comes to farmers caring about the environment, fairly well the same attitude among small and big farmers. I think big farmers tend to get more inspections though because they're more likely to be on schemes that require them.
Yeah, I would not be calling Irish farmers environmentalists here. We have awful water quality in areas due to farming.
They do what now? News to me.
Really not sure and curious how you're jumping to that conclusion. Can you elaborate?
It does reek of hollow, cowardly theatrics.
Waiting until their vote means nothing, then striking a meaningless moral pose to appease a domestic audience, all the while keeping their European Commission puppet masters happy.
An absolutely spineless government.
Only a "Union" when its leaders want it to be. No trouble keeping Orban in. No trouble bringing contaminated meat in either.
If the deal passes it'll be because the majority of member countries voted for it. Sounds democratic to me.
So why is Hungary still in?
Literally no relevance to your point at all but go off
I still hope it passes. The EU needs to diversify their trade away from the US/China. This would be a good start.
The US I understand, but why does the EU need to diversify trade away from China?
So we dont become over reliant on a different superpower. Thats long term though, the US is the more immediate problem.
Fair enough. I wouldn't see China as any sort of threat
For a long time we didn't see the US as any sort of threat.
If the current mess has taught us anything, it should really be that over-reliance on any one partner is just creating a single point of failure - because reliable today does not guarantee reliable tomorrow, or in a year, or ten, or fifty.
That's aside from whether you see China as a threat/risk or not, which I think a lot of people wouldn't be so quick to agree on.
Because China is an authoritarian state who would prey on the weakness of the EU
Prey? Are you suggesting that China is a predator?
Of course they are. Like all superpowers are. They're not doing anything for the benefit of other countries.
I'm not sure about that. China forgives tons of debt to developing African countries and provides interest-free loans. That's mutually beneficial for the recipients and for China.
Of course you can say it's in their interest because then China will have stronger trading partners in Africa to buy their commodities and so on. But it sounds like a win-win situation to me.
Yea, China is in Africa out of the goodness of their heart… There is a lot of evidence that China is engaging in a type of neocolonialism in Africa.
Yes. Yes they are
What makes you say that?
Uses economic power to dominate weaker states
Traps countries in debt to gain power over them
Buys or controls key ports and infrastructure in smaller states to better control them
Extracts resources with little local benefit for the nations
Controls states through trade dependence
Is aggressive with their land claiming. Often threatens the freedom of soverignty of Republic of China
Uses military to intimidate neighbour countries
Occupied and subjugates Tibet
Genocide against Uyghurs
Etc, etc
The concept of debt-trap diplomacy has long been debunked. See: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/08/debunking-myth-debt-trap-diplomacy
[removed]
[removed]
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R2] Respect Others
Debate the topic, not the person.
Personal insults, abusive or hostile language — whether aimed at other users or public figures — will not be tolerated.
You can challenge ideas, but you must do so constructively.
Assuming it passes anyway?
I think overall, while the deal has agricultural and environmental issues, the deal would be good for Ireland. Dan O’Brien went through the numbers and stated that the deal has more positives than negatives for Irelands
Probably passes anyways...but which numbers?
I only hear vague vibes of "freer trade is always good" and the agricultural industry is too small to listen to.
But the EU's own material on the deal lists Agricultural products as one of the top imported goods.
Which is why agriculture is basically the only sector against it. It's the exports that are the benefits and they will benefit the 90% of people that aren't farmers.
....who probably live in Germany and not Ireland.
Opening a market of 280 million to Irish exporters will be of benefit. The question is, will it outweigh the cost. Many seem to think so.
No offense but Im explicitly saying I don't think vibes are a good enough reason. I'd like to see numbers or stats that show specific Irish industries benefiting.
I can understand how German car manufacturers benefit. I dont think it helps us.
We manufacture a lot of pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Access to that market would be a lifeline to the Irish economy when America is closing down more and more.
In another comment I mentioned Pharma.
Often you don't have a choice with Pharma so you just pay the tax.
Do the Americans have a better trade deal than the EU with pharma?
It’s not just vibes, billions do Euros will be saved and new markets will open up for Irish exporters. Pharma and medical devices will be winners, as well as smaller SME’s like our drinks industry. Also opens up services.
https://www.reddit.com/r/irishpolitics/s/hJuiWANFTM
Agricultural inside the EU is heavily protected. I get the reasons for this, but Irelands agricultural sectors amounts for 1% of our GDP only. Looking at the raw numbers, the Mercosur deal would be a positive but the farming lobby in Ireland is vocal and organised.
I mean you've just reiterated that agriculture is too small to listen to.
But agriculture is not important for economic reasons, its important for quality/security/environmental reasons and regardless evidently Mercursor cares a lot about it otherwise it wouldn't be front and centre, so its not nothing to them.
For Ireland specifically.... I've doubts it actually is beneficial. The only other physical goods we really care about is pharma, this may make it easier to sell in Mercursor..... but I've no idea what the competition is like, for some pharma goods you don't have a choice and just have to suck it up and pay the taxes. It seems mostly a deal for the automotive sector.
I didn’t say too small to listen to, but there are others perhaps we should listen to as well.
We export more than pharma to the world.
depends. Argentinian/Uruguayan beef is superior to irish, as the climate/land is vastly better, and at least in Uruguay, better regulated than the EU. Brazilian beef uses low quality breeds adapted to heat and is enviromentally compromised.
Because it's their only meaningful export. If all you have to sell is soybeans, beef and rice, you care a lot about soybeans, beef and rice.
Eh? Beyond the usual reddit hating on Irish agriculture for reddit reasons how can you say superior?
We have excellent climate/land for beef and I don't see how our regulations are lacking
This is a good start:
https://claude.ai/share/1bca1f6c-21e6-4224-8c48-4645029119dc
Bottom line, Argentina and Uruguay have deep soils, warm year-round growing season, and rains ideal for Angus/Hereford mixes, while irish land turns to muck in winter.
WRT regulations, Uruguay tracks each cattle individually, something that is not enforced in the EU: https://www.the-land-group.com/field-notes/uruguays-advanced-cattle-traceability-system-a-global-benchmark
Its funny because my own AI search used opposing points, saying the marble was superior on Irish beef etc
I dont think you can say it is superior, I think you want to say it is.
Up to the reader to decide, then. Feel free to share your interaction. Cheers.
It was just a google search but Gemini Pro agrees, https://g.co/gemini/share/5f8352d23de2
Our GDP means very little. Big difference between multinational profits whisked through without paying tax, vs hundreds of thousands of jobs distributed throughout the country, spending money here and paying their taxes.
The amount of beef that would be exported to Ireland from Brazil would be tiny. About 1.8% of total EU production.
And would likely only be imported here if someone created a demand for it.
Its likely to pass but not guaranteed. It depends on how Italy votes : https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2026/01/02/mercosur-trade-deal-expected-to-be-agreed-in-weeks/
Italy is apparently learning toward voting in favour of the deal.