Colony Collapse = California's Fault

Reli

Reli

Well-known member
Aren't almonds one of the worst water-wasting crops? If so, they shouldn't even be allowed in CA.
 
bruceflinch

bruceflinch

I love Da Whores
As a novice beekeeper, I'm blown away by the lack of common sense and/or disregard by farmers... fuckers.
 
Climber

Climber

Well-known member
CoorsLight said:
Yeah, but the CA economy gets $21.5B a year, and all we have to pay is our future!
Click to expand...
Where are you coming up with your numbers?

Last year they had a record almond crop - 2.45 Billion Pounds (Source). Not sure how that puts $21.5 Billion into the economy, I didn't think that almonds were $10/lb.
 
CABilly

CABilly

Splitter
Climber said:
Where are you coming up with your numbers?

Last year they had a record almond crop - 2.45 Billion Pounds (Source). Not sure how that puts $21.5 Billion into the economy, I didn't think that almonds were $10/lb.
Click to expand...

The whole operation probably gets factored in. Tractors, sprays, wages, etc
 
CABilly

CABilly

Splitter
Climber said:
Wouldn't that be some portion of the profit?

The industry isn't going to spend more than it's making.
Click to expand...

The almonds don’t just get sold once. Processors and wholesalers buy them from the ranchers. Those are then bought by distributors and retailers. Then the consumer buys it. All along the way people are spending and making money from almonds. The don’t get shipped for free. They don’t get packaged for free. Everyone who makes or spends a buck gets factored in.
 
Last edited:
Reli

Reli

Well-known member
HappyHighwayman said:
California supplies 80% of the country's almonds
Click to expand...
Plus everything China wants

We should be encouraging people to eat stuff like walnuts and pecans instead, they're grown in places where there's no drought. Plus they're better-tasting anyway IMO.
 
Last edited:
Climber

Climber

Well-known member
CABilly said:
The almonds don’t just get sold once. Processors and wholesalers buy them from the ranchers. Those are then bought by distributors and retailers. Then the consumer buys it. All along the way people are spending and making money from almonds. The don’t get shipped for free. They don’t get packaged for free. Everyone who makes or spends a buck gets factored in.
Click to expand...
Think it through. If Almonds are selling for $7/lb (not sure, using for example), the farmer isn't going to sell it for anywhere near that much because several more places are going to touch it.

But, you don't get to double-dip on the amounts paid. Say the farmer gets paid $2/lb, then the distributer gets paid $4/lb. That doesn't mean $6, it means $4. If the processor also packages and sells it for $6/lb, that doesn't mean $12, it means $6, if the final seller charges $7/lb, that doesn't mean $19, it means $7 is put into the economy. The expenses along the way don't add to the total, they get deducted from the incremental total then added in their own place.

That's probably what the promotion paper was probably doing to inflate numbers, double, triple, quadruple dipping on the number to make Almonds seem more attractive to legislator's with a much higher (and false) number for adding to the economy.
 
Last edited:
UDRider

UDRider

FLCL?
Also how many of those people involved in distribution of Almonds are actually in CA?
Full disclosure I don't know myself, but should be considered when debating economic impact to California.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top