Farmer Diaries

Over the weekend a study came out here which showed that the price of dryers (washers too by the way) had risen by an average of US$ 90.00 per machine. Following the imposition of tariffs (and aluminum too) on washing machines, some manufacturing was relocated to the US.  It is estimated that nearly 2,000 jobs were created.  As an individual that is suddenly working at manufacturing washing machines in the US, for them it's a good thing -- they have a job.  For everyone else (who is buying a washing machine) its a bad thing. The number came out and what was surprising is that after years of falling prices for washer&dryers the price suddenly shot up.  In fact, and that's the interesting part, not only did the price of foreign washing machine rise, so did the price of domestic ones.   The total cost of the tariffs has been estimated at US$ 1.5 billion -- the Treasury department got about US$ 78 million and the rest was for the benefits of the new workers (yeah) and to t

Well, that's Monday morning for you, and it's not even April 1... So this morning Trump suggested that Boeing rebrand their aircraft, as a way of winning back the flying public.  There are a few problems here, first and foremost 99% of the flying public could not tell the difference between a Boeing 737 and an Airbus 320, secondly, the "public" for Boeing are the airlines.  Now there are between 5,000 and 5,500 airlines in the world, but in reality "real" airlines there are only 700-800 operating in the world. I would be very surprised that these "customer" could not see through a rebranding effort, when in fact the B737 is Boeing's workhorse aircraft and has for the past 40 years.   The problem is not the brand, in fact, the B737 is very respected.  The problem is this aircraft and its apparent instability that has bee managed by software -- without, it seems, informing/training the crew on how it works, what it does and how to shut it dow

A few weeks ago President Trump was all excited by the idea that the entire legislation would be found illegal -- funny how Trump loves activist judges when it favor's his desired outcome, and that the entire law would, in fact, be unconstitutional.  This, of course, is the result of the GOP Congress stripping out a specific aspect of the Obamacare legislation. Imagine his disappointment when the GOP refused to carry the water for the President -- and indicated that they had no plan, no timetable, no ideal or even analysis of what the future of healthcare should look like.  For Trump the objective was (a) remove Obamacare -- and destroy Obama's legacy, (b) get someone to do something about healthcare that was "cheap and great".  That's the sum total of the White House's contribution to the debate. What is clear is that after the massive tax cut that took place in 2018 -- and yes the reality of lower reimbursements is partly the result of less retention at