Farmer Saint

Lower end farmers won't be affected, that's the point. £3m is a lot of farm, and tends to not be family farms.

Apologies, I misunderstood what you wrote.

The interesting thing is I would expect I am very close to you geographically and I would assume I know the farmers you are talking about. For instance I don't know any farmers who send their kids to private school - that is not a thing and in general farming children go to small country schools - private schools are frowned upon as you don't need them to go to agri college and most farmers want to keep farming in the family.

Only the fucking stupid ones, and it also depends on what you class as "farmers".

Considering I've said he should leave for the past 6 weeks I'm not sure that's correct. Who else have I found fault in? For instance I would happily take Moyes, but he won't come.

In general farmers are not well off - 100% - and people like Clarkson have done a few things which juxtapose the current issues, but also give a warped view of what farmers and farming is as an industry. 1. Farming is very high risk, and is very high turnover but equally very high expenditure. Margins are tiny and are subject to huge variances based on the issues with hugely variable weather and the price of commodities and animals. Half your life you are farming hugely long hours and the other half you are trying to be a trader. It's damn hard graft. 2. A lot of rich people invest in farms, and people like Clarkson has made those outside farming think they are all rich mega landowners which just isn't true. Most are taking home less than £40k pa, without an income from a partner, as due to the unsociable hours there is certainly still a thing as a "farmers wife". 3. Farming is not just those that own farms - there are huge amounts of supporting contractors and supply chain that don't own farms or land that the public would call "farmers". They are not, and some of these people make huge amounts of money (agricultural contractors for one - these are the ones you see with £500k combines). 4. Yes, farmers tend to have nice tractors, but there is a reason for that. Tractors break. A lot. A tractor breaks at the wrong time and it can cost you 10s of thousands in revenue due to not being able to do work when you need to. It is imperitive that your equipment is reliable. Here is a picture of what happened to one of my friends brand new Massey's last year when chipping - £140k:

I don't think it's going to be many family farms that are affected though - £3m is a fair old whack of agricultural land. What it may mean is that larger family farms get purchased by businesses if they cannot afford to pay it (these large farms tend to have more headroom). They also have 10 years to pay it.

Do I wade in on this issue or not? Hmmm... Ok, so I haven't travelled up to London today as I am on the fence as to whether I agree with this or not. I have let some of my workers go though. In general, for rural communities I don't. However there are many farmers selling off huge swathes of land for housing around us for millions. This is not right and is not the point of the agricultural land. It should be farmed, not built on. Secondly, the people that will be affected by this are those with "Super farms" - those like the Clarkson estate. Some of these farms tend to be underwritten by the businesses purchasing from them, and these are the farmers that do have money. However, I think the best option for this is that instead of paying inheritance tax on the handover, it should be levied as a charge against the agricultural holding for when any land is sold, so a further 20% on top of the Capital Gains is charged IF it is sold.

Have to agree to disagree here then.

Exactly - so you agree he is similar to Martin then, as I have been arguing.

I would prefer my next Manager to have managed more than 20 club games in the Championship, had a permanent club Management role and perhaps have significantly different tactics to our current Manager. Sorry for being so picky.

Blimey, that's what you call trying too hard? 3 sentences? You must be pretty darn lazy. Anyway, I'm just saying I don't think there is much in Carsley as a Manager, and that he is similar to Martin in hair-brained tactics and football style. The fact he has been managing one of the best squad of players in World football may have masked his abilities, that's all.

They were playing the Republic of Ireland, and it was 0-0 until they had a player sent off. England also had a team of players way above the quality of the Republic of Ireland. If we had those players and were playing a midtable Championship team I think we'd be disappointed to be 0-0 after 55 minutes, wouldn't you?

Exactly, he plays the same football as Martin.

Not really - he seems to be cut from the same cloth is the point.

Has Martin played it more than once? I thought he did Bournemouth but then not again.

He also played a game with no strikers, one of the big bats used to smack Martin.

Do people still use Twitter? Or is it just a rightwing echo-chamber? Just seems to be full of angry "Theitukrrjaaabss" types.

I think you've just described Western politics as a whole tbh.

Good on him!

It depends on whether decisions are just down to Ankersen or whether Manager hiring and firings are board decisions?

Ok, so I've seen this post as someone else has quoted it - however you have been on ignore (as I said you would be) since you told me that all 5-9 year olds in Gaza are fair game to be killed because they are Muslim. Frankly, I don't need to see posts from someone as morally and ethically repugnant as you. In relation to your post, let me break it down. Firstly, I never said there weren't any other possibilities - this is my opinion and has been for over a year. You have your appalling opinions, and in your opinion so do I. Secondly, you're thinking about this too simplisticly - yes it is a trait of yours - but even you should be able to see that we invested in players who we thought could do a job in the Premier League BUT would be unlikely to leave us next season if we went back down. The club probably knew that the likelihood was we'd get relegated, so why not build a strong core of players that we can use next season in the Championship - they will have played together for a season and will obviously know each others games far better. It would make us far stronger for when we come back up (not definite, but you would certainly aspire to judging by Ankersen's philosophy). They are for the most part young, and one thing we tend to know about young players is (a) they tend to be on smaller wages and (b) they tend to get better as their careers evolve. If we stayed up then great, but also if we went down we'd still be within PSR guidelines and we'd have an as strong, or stronger team than the one we got promoted with last time. Ramsdale was an exception, but we know (as does he) if we go down we will sell him and get our money back. I probably don't need to remind you that purchases are amortised over the contract years, but sales count against that year of PSR, giving us greater headroom next season when he is sold. Thirdly, just because you don't understand something doesn't make it bullshit. It just makes it something you don't understand. I won't be looking at your responses to this post - frankly I couldn't give a shiny fuck what someone like you thinks about what I post - but to me the evidence is there. Let's see what happens in January - will we be looking at young, high reward players that will stay with us in the Championship, or established Premier League/top 5 European League players? I know which ones I think we'll be purchasing.

Alright mate, we can't all be astronauts like you...

FFS, that's any credibility I had left down the fucking pan after that endorsement. Cheers pal.

I'm talking specifically about THB. He looked far better last season under RM. If he played like he has this year, last year, we wouldn't have signed him IMO (I'm aware we had to as it was tied to promotion). I'm just not convinced he's a PL defender, sorry.