Proudly sponsored by

Expropriation without compensation haunts agriculture

Agricultural output could have outpaced even the 70% it is estimated to have grown since 2010.
The sector is in an untenably grim situation. Image: Shutterstock

The threat of expropriation without compensation and the opportunity costs of land policy uncertainty have cast a dark shadow over the future and feasibility of the commercial agricultural sector – the one section of the local economy that has been a shining star amid the doom and despair of the 2020 economic disaster.

Aided by excellent rainfall, improved seed technology and a resilient spirit – despite safety concerns and continuous political assault by the governing ANC and the EFF – South African commercial agriculture is booming.

However, the Banking Association of South Africa (Basa), the Bureau for Economic Research (BER) at Stellenbosch University, and Agri SA as a representative of South African commercial agriculture all provide cold, hard factual evidence that so much more could have been done to the macro-economic benefit of the country and the welfare of all its people had the political and policy risks not been so immense.

Read: ‘Policy certainty is the cheapest form of stimulus’ – Reserve Bank advisor

But first, the good news.

Agricultural output is booming, despite the spectre of land expropriation, policy uncertainty, political vilification of commercial farmers and a disastrous state-driven land reform programme.

According to BER director Professor Johann Kirsten, “on the back of a fantastic agricultural year in 2020 (despite Covid-19) agricultural output is estimated to have grown by 44% since 2010”.

The bureau’s research shows horticultural production expanded by 70% over the same period, livestock production increased by 43% and field crop production by only 22% over the last decade.

As the table below indicates, the exact high-value, labour-intensive agricultural industries which the economy needs to expand, have grown substantially:

Commodity Unit Expansion target (NDP 2030) Actual expansion (2012-2018) Achievement (%)
Citrus Ha 15 000 23 448 156%
Macadamias Ha 12 000 14 600 122%
Apples Ha 2 500 2 256 90%
Table grapes Ha 4 700 3 773 80%
Avocados Ha 9 000 3 700 41%
Soyabeans Ha 370 000 312 000 84%
Poultry Tons 660 000 270 000 41%
Dairy Tons 520 000 655 000 126%
Pork Tons 25 000 53 000 212%

Source: BFAP, 2020

Cognisant of these facts, Agri SA CEO Christo van der Rheede nevertheless points out that while such growth does not negate the opportunity costs of land policy uncertainty, it might mask it.

“The growth in agricultural production was unfortunately often not achieved thanks to state policy, but despite it,” Van der Rheede told Moneyweb.

He points out the excellent rainfall over most of the country (except for the Northern Cape and adjacent parts of the Western Cape and Eastern Cape). Van der Rheede furthermore points to the resilience of farmers and improved seed technology to explain the much higher yield.

“This does not mean that we should forget the opportunity cost of land policy uncertainty. Can you imagine where we would have been in such fortuitous circumstances if we had a stronger government department and did not labour under the constant threat of expropriation without compensation?” he asks.

“One might well ask why commercial farmers do not just pack up and go. The reason is their debt to commercial banks and the Land Bank. The truth is that many commercial farmers farm on the back of debt.”

Two saving graces

The facts bear out Van der Rheede’s view, save for perhaps two saving graces, both driven by the excellence of the incumbent Minister of Agriculture Rural Development and Land Reform Thoko Didiza.

The first is that the South African government (at times Didiza personally) has been working pro-actively to ensure access to foreign markets so that the lopsided domestic supply of a bumper crop is ameliorated by export, thereby limiting the lowering of the domestic price.

The second is that Didiza lobbied tirelessly and successfully so that agriculture – although impacted – did not suffer the destruction many other industries did during South Africa’s Covid-19 hard lockdown.

Save for these, the utter failure – due to an aversion to commercial farming, the inability of communal farmers to produce surpluses for sale on the commercial markets, the choice by many of the newly-empowered to opt for a monetary pay-out rather than land restitution, corruption, maladministration and the ineptitude of departmental officials – of the state-led land reform programme is well documented and need not be revisited here.

Land reform progress

Kirsten provides figures to show that the steps taken by commercial agriculture and farming organisations to enhance land reform have, on the other hand, been very successful.

South Africa’s total land area is 122 million hectares, of which 93 million hectares is agricultural land. Of this, 77.5 million hectares is commercial farming land and 15.5 million hectares is under tradition tenure.

According to the Deeds Office, by November 2020 13.2 million hectares had changed hands from white owners to the state (3.08 million hectares) and black farmers (10.135 million hectares) through private and state-supported transfers.

By November 2020, no less than 2 339 million hectares had been successfully identified for restitution but the affected communities chose money over land.

In total, therefore, 15.56 million hectares have been transferred in land or in cash. This is 20% of previously white-owned land and is getting close to the 30% of previously white-owned land (23.25 million hectares) envisaged in the National Development Plan, Kirsten pointed out.

Risk  to the banking sector

As Van der Rheede pointed out, commercial farmers owe the banks billions, meaning the banks face the greatest opportunity costs due to policy uncertainty and the greatest financial risk due to expropriation without compensation.

In a presentation to parliament, Basa managing director Cas Coovadia stated that commercial banks are currently owed R1.6 trillion in relation to property. Of this, R1.068 trillion is owed on residential property, R393 billion on commercial and industrial property and R133 billion by commercial farmers.

Coovadia states that expropriation without compensation has limited investments in and improvements on land, and that growth in employment can only follow on growth in investment.

He points out that a modern economy is mainly based on the credit structures of various role players and their risk profiles. This structure delivers the yield which is required to compensate for the risk.

“Widespread expropriation without compensation has the potential to create systemic risk for the South African banking sector, as loan agreements do not typically foresee the scenario of forcible change through seizure below market value,” Coovadia continues.

The banking sector will therefore be exposed to a higher-than-anticipated debt write-off if expropriation without compensation takes root widely.

Basa’s input furthermore focuses on the negative effect expropriation without compensation has on the appeal of property as a safe and profitable asset/investment requiring long-term confidence, as it does.

Coovadia therefore warns of the impact of widespread expropriation without compensation on the credit ratings of South African banks, on the tightening of lending rates and on mortgages, which will reflect higher risk.

Basa warns of further sovereign downgrade risks, an increased cost of capital and compromised access to funding, as effects of the looming spectre of expropriation without compensation and the policy uncertainty flowing from it.

Jan-Jan Joubert is a political journalist, commentator and writer.

COMMENTS   53

Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.

SIGN IN SIGN UP

This will soon change. The regime does not tolerate anything that functions properly, and will soon transform it into another disaster. If you want to destroy something, just transform it.

Yes.

I am invested for exactly that. The continuous ANC disaster. The strong rand is an opportunity to pick up a few more foreign assets cheaply form earlies profits.

That’s all is is. Then you just sit back and wait for these idiots to do what they do.

Agreed but one minor comment. I do not think the ruling ANC cabal are “idiots”. They are self interested, greedy and venal parasites who will destroy SA for their own personal gain.

Yes Paul absolutely agree: they are “slim and skelm”

Paul – it is my pleasure to introduce you to Hanlon’s Razor.

if only they would realize….they will ONLY get the land…not the prosperity created by the “Farmer”…..thus doomed because they just can’t create anything other than destruct!

I also invest like that, expecting disaster in the ANC making. That’s why, in the long-term, most of our investment calls are correct, than not.

Absolutely but once it has been destroyed one transforms it a second time to make absolutely sure that it can never recover.

Invictus, agreed but once it has been destroyed one transforms it a second time to make absolutely sure that it never recovers. Paul one of the issues in Zimbabwe was that there was a financial benefit for the politically connected for the country to fail. For example when I was there in 2005 civil servants could exchange Zim dollars the official exchange rate of about 15 000 to one and sell them on the black market at about 200 000 for one. SO the weaker the Zim dollar was the more money they made creating a incentive to weaken the currency further.

Transformation ( South African meaning ) = Setting something functioning up for spectacular failure.

And they are radically transforming SA from the most industrialised nation in Africa to a de-industrialised nation. Like Zanu radically transformed Zim from the breadbasket of Africa to a basket case.

I am quite the optimist, every day wake up and read the news and financials hoping that someone in the political sphere will stand up and not only say something smart but also implement it.

Then i realise that, Light Travels faster than Sound so some people appear bright you hear them speak…

Can we get some figures on the production from the land now given to black farmers? In my district the production after the change has fallen to zero. Why? No support from government.

Support structures were removed in 1995 by the then Minister of Agriculture Derek Hanekom. Reason? It benefited white farmers.

As a farmer for the last 49 years I have interacted with Government via organized Agriculture and with the new emerging farmers in my district.

Feedback:
1) EF (Emerging Farmers) say it is tough, even with advice from the white farmers they still need government support.
2) Government plays this card everytime pre and post elections.
3) Nothing happens or if something does it is slow and corrupt.
4) Most of the black people in SA want 1000 Square meters close to their work to build a house on and have security.
5) Most have jobs in town, driven there by ANC rural policies and are not interested in relocating to the karroo or other remote areas.
6) There are no decent schools in the rural areas.
7) Rural towns will soon be a thing of the past.
8) Banks have closed, doctors have left, chemists are closed.
9) Hardly any rail services left.
10) Most of SA has marginal rainfall and large areas are very cold in winter and hot as hell in summer.
11) The longer this takes the less likely there will be people willing to move back to farms. 26 years later there is a generation that have seldom been out of the cities.
12) Those left on the farms know how hard it is.

My Grandchild’s nearest doctor and decent hospital is 400km from them.

If the rural areas were more attractive and functioned, then this would be a threat, but in most of SA the weather is inhospitable and the problems listed above prevail.

Farms in gentler climates close to town may be under threat but not the deep rural areas.

@pwgg. Agree & I hear you.

Farming has become a political play-ball, hence little Govt support to Emerging farmers. Votes for the ANC, it’s all there is to it.
(The ANC do not want the commercial farmers to leave, otherwise they don’t have a scategoat to drum up against.)

Btw, in which region/district are you farming?

I farmed as a manager in Viljoenskroon and Port Elizabeth coastal then bought my farm in Molteno. Have been there since 1985. Son farming now.

@pwgg.

Yes, Viljoenskroon, being quite near to us in Orkney/Klerksdorp. Now farming in Molteno you say, with your son proudly taking over from his dad 😉

Dis mos groot skaap wereld daai 🙂

And in winter, one of the coldest places in SA….maybe I must come and visit in winter, and drive through the ‘Alpine’ snow….the natural habitat of a Fiat Panda 4×4…

Micheal you welcome anytime.

Yes we sheep and cattle farmers.

The ANC has shown us that it is merely impossible for stupid people to implement intelligent ideas. People of inferior cognitive ability do not identify or realise their own shortcomings. They are always confident and act out of conviction. Stupid people act on what they see, while intelligent people also consider the scenarios that must be foreseen.

People who can, and do read, who think logically with deductive reasoning, who study politics, economics and history, are able to act with foresight. Intelligent people doubt themselves, they search for more information, they seek confirmation from other intelligent people and they subject themselves to peer reviews.

Stupid people identify other stupid people to test their ideas on. They search for support and confirmation from other stupid people. They motivate each other out of stupidity. This is why unscrupulous leaders will always select the group with the lowest cognitive ability to build a constituency. It is easy to persuade a group of stupid people to stand together, to unite behind a stupid cause. It is easy for a leader to motivate stupid people into action. Stupid people do not have ideas of their own. They settle for any idea that is presented to them by the smartest stupid person among them. An innovative career politician will always target the most cognitively impaired group in the community. This is why Julius Malema is the leader of the EFF, by the way, and that is why the EFF has its economic policies.

It is hard for a righteous leader to persuade and motivate intelligent people. Intelligent people are educated and they can think for themselves. They can form their own ideas. They do not need leaders to form ideas for them. Intelligent people do not form large groups. They hardly ever stand together. They are individualists who are critical of mass action.

This is why politics is always a threat to intelligent people and why the political economy in any country is never optimal. Democracy is like the game of golf, the system handicaps the best players, to give the less-capable people an opportunity to determine policy.

The govt. is distributing their own land.

There is so much unused land.

Have you ever flown from jhb to cpt?

Did you see how little the human foot print is?

Most of the land between Johburg and Cape Town belongs to private owners. The government does own a lot of land, and I am convinced that government land, and not productive farmland, will be redistributed. Furthermore, the traditional land that is held in trust should also be cut up and the inhabitants should receive title deeds.
Productive farmland and private property won’t be redistributed under the current process. That being said, let’s not be naive. We have various infringements on property rights already. BEE legislation, the Mining Charter, the redistributive municipal rates and taxes, the security of tenure laws, the expropriation of mineral rights and water rights and labour laws are attacks against property rights.

The ANC has made their intentions clear with all these laws. The ANC is as big a threat to property rights as the EFF is. They chop down the tree, one blow at a time, in the parliament.

JHB to DT is over a lot of the karroo, low carrying capacity so large areas needed to run sheep. That’s why the “foot print” is not evident, farmsteads are far apart.

Although you sound very intelligent and your writing sound like that of a well verse person I have but a few objections. Number 1 – you writing is of the same trend all of the time – we heard you the first time. Number 2 – have you ever written something positive?

Sensei, I am the first to admire someone with great writing skills, but balance can achieve so much more. With great power, comes great responsibility 😉

In you humble opinion – where do you see the opportunities in the current environment? Other than that, what other short term solutions would you suggest?

It is very simple my friend. I quote Margaret Thatcher when she slammed a copy of Fredrich Hayek’s “The Constitution of Liberty” on the desk in parliament and said, “This is what we believe!”.

The solution to our economic problems is property rights. We face similar challenges to what Britain faced under the Labour Party. Thatcher broke the back of the unions to cure the “sick man of Europe”. The ANC is the problem, and it is impossible for them to bring solutions. The economic policy of the DA or the FF+ will grow this country at 4% annually and create jobs. By the way, most of the ideas for the statements in the previous post comes from that book.

This is the solution you asked for. If you have read some of my posts this will sound very familiar to you. I have repeated it a thousand times. You are not paying attention! ☺

@Sensei – thanks, and do you see opportunities with the hand currently dealt?

Read an interesting comment on solutions on an Afrikaans Thread:

“Die groot demper op groei is dat SAners inherent lui is en glo dat alles hulle toekom. Die oplossing is beter opleiding, ‘n sterker verband tussen werk en besoldiging, m.a.w., as ek hard werk, verdien ek meer geld, nie bietjie meer en klomp ekstra belasting nie; vereenvoudig wetgewing vir klein sake; verminder “regte” van werknemers dat klein sake vinniger mense in diens kan neem en laat gaan; skrap die minimum loon; maak lenings aan klein sake makliker bekombaar; stop staatsbesteding aan mense wat nie enige bydrae tot die ekonomie oor hulle hele lewe gemaak het nie; verminder regte van vakbonde; ens. ens. Maar net ‘n donkie stamp sy kop twee-maal teen dieselfde klip. Rusland, Kuba, Pole, Oos-duitsland, Tjeggslovakeie, …”

Lord Beerus, thank you for the opportunity. I believe that opportunity is the flipside of the problem. An opportunity is simply the solving of an existing problem. There are many opportunities in South Africa because there are many problems. Look at our burgeoning informal sector for instance. The enormous constraints on the formal sector create huge opportunities in the informal sector.

Socialist policies and laws like BEE, the Mining Charter, labour laws, the minimum wage, the tax regime and cadre-deployment kills entrepreneurship in the formal industry. In effect, these very same laws act as a subsidy to the informal sector because those laws are not enforced in the informal sector. The informal sector does not pay the minimum wage, does not keep to labour laws, working hours and holidays. No BEE requirements. No taxes.

The Mining Charter and BEE requirements that disincentivise investments in the mining and construction industries, enable the Zamma-Zamma, tenderpreneurs and construction mafia to flourish.

Our people are entrepreneurial and the government policies determine the direction in which those entrepreneurs exploit the opportunities. There is a direct link between government policies and entrepreneurship. These policies direct resources to either the formal industry where contribute to taxes and employment, or to the formal industry where it contributes nothing.

A socialist government changes a formal economy into an informal economy, employment into unemployment, national income into national debt, assets into liabilities and peace into social unrest. We have reached the final stage.

@Lord Beerus (the God of Destruction).

Asking for short term solutions?

To add to what Sensei, PurgeCoin, Tigerfish, TheSpeculator, HardlyAnything already said…..also check that your PASSPORT (and those of your family) has not expired 😉

It’s like standing on the sinking TITANIC and asking for a solution *lol*
I point you to the position of the Life Rafts…there’s your short term solution.

(…little point in the minority trying fix the leaking hull, when the majority rips apart the metal hull, for intended scrap metal sale..IF they reach shore)

You know the country is in trouble with Stupid People are full of confidence and Clever People are full of doubt.

Please share your address for the delivery of a case of Bells.

I would like to see the number of unused farms owned by religious groups…

Most definitely the wisdom for the week, thanks Sensei!

Twitter has helped this cause tremendously – it has made it so simple for the likes of the EFF to recruit, motivate and indoctrinate the stupid who further spread such stupid doctrine to more of the stupid, ultimately causing a massive tidal wave of stupid.

My advice to all farmers . Manage your debt but keep your debt . The Government knows it takes your farm it takes your debt . It protects you in a way ( the debt ) . Government hasn’t got a clue how to deal with this ! Zim farmers left their government with a mountain of debt …..

At the end of the day that debt will not help. This lot will just right it off.

I’m trying to understand your (pwgg) and Andrew’s comments. On what basis does or will EWC compel the state to take both the asset and debt? Do we know this for sure?

Is it not possible that the state takes the asset leaving the previous owner with the debt and no asset? If so, the previous owner is likely to be insolvent leaving the lender with an unsecured loan which it needs to write off. In other words, could EWC leave the owner asset-less AND the lender without security?

In which case, if the lender is a state entity this write off will be for the account of the taxpayer.

If the lender is a non-state bank the write off will be for the account of the shareholders and, if shareholder funds do not suffice, for the account of depositors. If the bank is systemically important (too important to fail) the taxpayer may underwrite depositors (likely) and shareholders (unlikely).

Total farm debt is a shade under R200 billion …….hard to right off when you think that Nedbank is worth R50 billion .

Guys, you forget that one man’s debt is another man’s asset. Ten per cent of that loan that the bank forwarded to the farmer belongs to the depositor who saved his money at the bank. The rest, 90% of the loan, is money that the bank created out of thin air through the money multiplier effect, that is legal under the specifics of the Banking Act. What it all boils down to is this – if the value of the collateral declines by a mere 10%, then the depositor’s total savings is gone.

Let that sink in……and then you will understand that expropriation without compensation will clean out every cent in the bank account of every person who earns a salary, has savings, or owns a bank account or a pension fund.

Each and every small infringement on property rights flow all the way through to asset valuations, the value of the collateral in the banking system, and eventually, to the purchasing power of the currency. This is the chain than links infringements on property rights to hyperinflation of the currency. Property rights are a matter of life and death.

One step more; borrow on your farm etc but buy assets outside of SA.

Not a bad plan.
Take my fram = take my debt.
But keep living a decent life.

Government will simply print money to plug the debt, ultimately leading to massive hyperinflation and before you know it = Zim 2.0

@Andrew. True, to a point. Remember that most farming debt is owed to local commercial banks. So the banks will get hurt.

Hence if I’m allowed to ‘fine tune’ your planning: indeed, keep your debt local, but also try to keep a large portion of your life savings/assets abroad.

The ANC’s internal policy is one of collapse of productivity.

That will enable what NDZ let slip as “class suicide” whereby everybody is so poor that there cannot be a differentiation between people based on class or wealth.

The flipside is that collapse of productivity in SA plays in the ANC culture of tenders for transport and supply.

If all our food is produced outside the country, there will be kickbacks for “enabling” the import of food. Similarly, there will be kickbacks for “enabling” the transport and distribution.

Of course, the ANC doesn’t think further than their egos and they have not yet realised that if we produce nothing as a country and we are dirt poor, there will not be much of a country left to “govern” and even less to steal, so the ANC rats will start eating each other (not unlike they have been doing in KZN and Mpumpalanga where they have been “eliminating” opponents within their own party)

All I can say to those who still believe that expropriation is only political talk and will never be implemented broadly or will only be used for state land or homelands is that I would not take any African government lightly when it comes to land grabs.

Despite all logic and all reason in the eyes of the majority the minority are only invaders, it doesn’t matter that you have been here for hundreds of years or even if you bought your land in the “new” South Africa with money that you earned through your own labor. As long as you are part of the minority you stole the land, no debate and no recourse.

Many Zimbabwean farmers who bought land after 1980 received certificates from the government stating that there are no claims on the land and that the land will not be confiscated by the government. In the end those certificates were not worth the paper they were written on and they received no help from police or the justice system.

My point is simply this, if you own land currently in SA and think your title deed means something, think again. Make sure that if your land is taken and the justice system fails you that you have enough other assets (preferably outside SA) that you will not be left with nothing.

You touched on a big concern. What is the value of a title deed when the deeds office topples over? The entire modern economy is built on top of the deeds office. If a crack appears in the foundation of the deeds office, then the entire formal economy will be reduced to a heap of rubble.

“Those who can read, don’t count. Those who can’t read, don’t care.” This sums up the ANC electorate who facilitates the implementation of the socialist agenda.
If you think this will suddenly change, then you are a fool. There are no happy endings, just future generations who will endure poverty and despair in another failed socialist state.

A commercial mindset always results in the same outcome- the assumption of a scarce and competitive reality over the Reality of an abundant and cooperative Nature. It always manifests a host of harmful side effects in the form of pollutants that alter the nature of the intended output.

This so often results in the reversal of the key benefits usually associated with that output. Very similar to the Pharmaceutical regime upon whom Agriculture is more and more dependent.

Reversals, such as:

– The 3rd generation that eats genetically modified foods will be sterile.
– The human immune system requires complex organic compounds in order to build the blocks of enhanced immune and healing systems in the human body. These are not available from most commercially grown crops and animal husbandry outputs.
– Monoculture- i.e. big commercial Ag, even using crop rotation, is dependent on a very narrow range of crops- maize, wheat, soya beans maybe some cabbage, potatoes and carrots as well…. Year in, year out. They are totally dependent on ploughing the earth and laying down chemical fertilizers. They have to double their load annually or change the genetics of the plants to not require so many nutrient inputs. Apart from the decline in nutrition, this results in a massive loss of topsoil annually through wind exposure and the exponential polluting of our rivers and groundwater.

The first priority of a “communal” farmer or forager is to feed her own family and domestic animals.
If there is a surplus left after this, then that is a marketable surplus. It should go without saying that an organic business should always focus on growing organically- i.e. without any debt! Sources of wealth here include a positive attitude, better physical health, freedom from fear, less stress etc. financial security is a concern, but it is not necessarily the number 1 priority.

In order to grow healthy organic food, at least a segment of agriculture has to be ostensibly de-industrialised. Organic techniques begin with establishing the fertility of the soil by building her up rather than cutting her down.

To make these quantum gains in fertility, and re establish natural succession in our soils, a lot more hands-on people living on the lands is needed. A wide diversification in outputs grown from ancient heritage seed banks and stock will be the result (like sorghum instead of maize). All round better health, community, ecology and environment.

Reducing the issue to a polarised, political matter is to reduce to a fear-based duality and fail to address the core issues.

Those who wish to continue operating (and consuming) under persistent conditions of reducing marginal utility (for gm and chemical-dependent processes) must simply accept declining terms of trades and eroding margins- bankruptcy even. This goes along with a decline in immune and healing abilities and a drop off in brain function potentially…

As Lord Beerus above says- not very useful in terms of imaginatively and intuitively proposing some potential beneficial alternatives to the way things have been done up to here, this fear-based commercial mindset.

Ellison, with respect. While I agree with some of your points, I do not agree with the general trend. If your assumptions were correct, then the communalist farmers on the old Transkei side of the border should be healthier and wealthier than the commercial farmers on the South African side of the fence.

The fact that the commercial farmers have a title deed to the property, and that the profit motive motivates them to be efficient, results in their cattle being healthy, fat and fertile. Their land is not degraded or eroded. The grazing is healthy and abundant. This farmer is sustainable, employs people and contribustes the Treasury.

On the other side of the barbed-wire fence, with the same rainfall and soil-type, the cattle are tick-infested, emaciated and infertile. The soil is eroded and the field is overgrazed. The people suffer food insecurity, they are poor and dependent on the social grant that was funded by their commercial neighbour.

The rainfall and soil type is exactly the same. Both managers love their cattle. What explains the difference in outcome? Property rights enable the profit motive to motivate entrepreneurs to protect their environment. This is why the communalist mindset will eventually work for the capitalist mindset. This is inevitable. The mining industry depends on this phenomenon.

There you go – one simple ongoing experiment to prove your thesis wrong. I acknowledge that most spectators will take your side in this debate. You win the emotional side of the debate. I am happy with that. As long as I have made a clear point for free-market capitalism, I am happy.

Gentlemen, read all of the above and in a nut shell EWC will never work and will probably only be implemented on tracts of abandoned unproductive land. Landbank has lots of those to dish out.

As I said it gets raised pre and post election, both with ANC and EFF (who are ANC) and then it gets put on the backburner.

A comment on the same subject in another article briefly outlined who they would be trying to take from. Ex SADF, well trained men not about to give up anything.

Phew! Some very valid and concerning comment here to think about.
All I can say, is that like everything we deal with in this country…. A boer maak a plan! Always have…always will!
This country was built by farmers under Simon Van Der Stel…….this country will die with no farmers, I’m pretty sure even the most simple mind can grasp that. If not, then farewell to life as we know it!
And finally, let’s stop blaming politics for the demise of stability and life in this country….climate change and lack of sustainability will be our eventual demise.

“Can you imagine where we would have been in such fortuitous circumstances if we had a stronger government department and did not labour under the constant threat of expropriation without compensation?” he asks.”

Extrapolate to the rest of the economy …

No, ALL property owners should feel haunted (not only agriculture).

Can I ask my ANC & EFF compatriots to show their solidarity against the commercial farmer, BY STOP CONSUMING FOOD altogether.

In street talk…”stop eating”!! (That way you’ll hurt the farmer’s bottom line.)

But it will fall on deaf ears, as I continue to witness my ‘fat ass’ countrymen in public….all having the physique of baby hippos and elephants….so it seems like you have done the opposite and GONE OVERBOARD by supporting ‘our’ farmers by over-eating. Hence, I thank you!

You can grade them like slaughter stock, views from behind in parliament, the newbies only have one roll on the back of the neck!!!!!

EWC: Go for it, and let’s see where the bones fall! Could well be the grandest failure of them all.

End of comments.

LATEST CURRENCIES  

USD / ZAR
GBP / ZAR
EUR / ZAR
BTC / USD

Podcasts

INSIDER SUBSCRIPTIONS APP VIDEOS RADIO / LISTEN LIVE SHOP OFFERS WEBINARS NEWSLETTERS TRENDING PORTFOLIO TOOL CPD HUB

Follow us:

Search Articles:
Click a Company: