Gauteng Smallholder May 2017 | Page 3

GAUTENG COMMENT, by Pete Bower MAGAZINE HOW TO MAKE YOUR PLOT PROFITABLE Vol 18 No 5 May 2017 PUBLISHED BY Bowford Publications (Pty) Ltd Established 1985 (Reg No 2004/019727/07) PO Box 14648, Bredell 1623 Tel: 011 979-5088 or 076 176-7392 Fax: 086 602-3882 website: www.sasmallholder.co.za facebook.com/gautengsmallholder PUBLISHER & EDITOR Pete Bower email: [email protected] RESEARCH EDITOR Vanessa Bower email: [email protected] GRAPHIC DESIGNER Mark Hageman email: [email protected] ADVERTISEMENT SALES Pete Bower email: [email protected] ADVERTISING RATES ( All Rates Full C o l ou r , incl VAT ) Full Page - R7480 Half Page - R 4 620 Quarter P - R2570 1/8 page - R1360 Smaller sizes: R 104 per col cm (Minimum size - 4 col cm) ( Black only: colour rate less 2 0% ) Booking discounts (Payment lumpsum in advance ) 3 insertions - less 10% 6 insertions - less 15% (other payment and discount options are available) Circulation Area More than 1 9 000 copies * distributed free through outlets in the Agricultural Smallholding settlements of Gauteng and adjoining provinces. * excluding on-line readers. By Mail To receive the Smallholder by mail send us a supply of stamped, self- addressed A4 envelopes. Or, subscribe for only R210 per year. See coupon in this edition. Online http://www.sasmallholder.co.za Copyright Title and contents protected by copyright. No part of this publication may be reproduced or stored in any form whatsoever without the prior written permission of the publisher. Disclaimer While every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information in this journal, neither the Editor nor the Publisher can be held responsible for damages or consequences of any errors or omissions. The Publisher does not stand warranty for the performance of any article or service mentioned in this journal, whether in an advertisement or elsewhere. FRONT COVER A neat alternative to a trailer, and you can load it at ground level before lifting. Tractor mounted platform for moving bales, feed, manure, sand etc. Scary sloganeering P erhaps because of our previous education system which, concentrating as it did on learning by rote, does not encourage critical thought, ordinary South Africans are far too unquestioning when politicians come up with catchy slogans or “clever” ideas. Two such examples, that have been much in the news recently, are “radical economic transformation” and “white monopoly capital”. That the ruling elite has been bandying these phrases about unchallenged or at best with so little ridicule says much about our lack of critical thought. Which is a pity because those who use these phrases, and many more like them, should be roundly derided … laughed out of court, in fact. For at best such phrases are totally meaningless. At worst they are downright dangerous. Take the notion of “radical economic transformation” so beloved by Mr Zuma and his new finance minister. Any first-year student of economics will tell you that a functioning economy is like a machine of many parts, all operating interdependently, yet all achieving different outcomes. Thus, if you fiddle with one part it may well affect another, seemingly unrelated, part. And all economies function in relation to other economies, notably those of one's trading partners. As a quick example, if our central bank raises the interest rate it makes life more expensive for those individuals or businesses who wish to borrow money. That means they must increase the price at which they sell whatever goods or services they provide, adding to the possibility of higher inflation, among other things. On the other hand, a higher interest rate makes it possible for those who have money to invest to earn more. And if our interest rate is very much higher than that in other economies foreigners will view us as an attractive country in which to invest, ratings agency downgrades notwithstanding. Thus central bankers play a delicate game every day to juggle the numbers they can control, for example the interest rate, in an effort to positively influence or at least not harm, those numbers that they can't control. The point is that doing something drastic, something “radical”, to change the economy is not in the nature of a sensible economist. Now we know that South Africa is the most unequal society on earth, and we all pretty much acknowledge that steps must be taken to uplift the poor and make their lives easier, while not killing the goose that lays the golden eggs among those at the other end of the spectrum. But doing something “radical,” whatever that may be, will simply destroy the whole economy, and ruin the country. Think Zimbabwe. So when politicians such as Messrs Zuma and Gigaba rattle on about “radical economic transformation” we should not let them off the hook unchallenged. We should want to know exactly what it is they have in mind, if they have anything at all in mind, that is. Of course, if you are a politician, using the phrase “radical economic transformation” in the same sentence as “white monopoly capital” can conjure up a wonderous bogey- man in the minds of uneducated voters. For, if you push the notion of “us” versus “them” in which the “them” are the hated “white monopoly capital” class it is not difficult to get the downtrodden masses on your side. So let's look at the notion of white monopoly capital. It is a convenient little racist ploy to bandy about the idea that South Africa's wealth is in the hands of the white minority. While outwardly it may appear so, digging deeper, for example into the shareholdings of public companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, shows tha t the proportion of identifiable black stock ownership is now not much less than that of identifiable white ownership, and it is a devilishly difficult number to compute because of the interrelationships between companies. This, of course, is exactly as it should be even if it has come about through the artifice of black economic empowerment, which has made a few pigmentally-blessed individuals very wealthy, rather than benefiting the masses of the poor. And the notion that the country is being held to ransom by a kind of “monopoly” is also nonsense. A monopoly exists when one company has total control over its industry, and is therefore able to set prices, product characteristics, supply quantities etc, unfettered by the possibility of outside interference. Clearly, this does not happen in the greater South African scene, if for no other reason than because the Competition Commission would prevent it. Radical economic transformation and white monopoly capital take their place along- side the infinitely more dangerous notion of state capture by Zuma and his acolytes, and their puppet-masters of the Saxonwold shebeen (Thank you, Brian Molefe, for that expression). SAY YOU SAW IT IN THE GAUTENG SMALLHOLDER