Posts by rowdypilot19

slysurfer14 said:Actually, non-subsidies are still taxable, which is why so many Family Farms have frozen accounts—money hits the bank and nobody bothers to pay the tax bill...
Like this year, if some local official hands out $15,000 and people just grab it without thinking, once that cash hits the account, you're automatically flagged as a small business owner. Once you hit about 88 $0.00, you're on the hook.
But hey, that's what happens when the people running farms still think their grandfathers knew everything better than everyone else...

That's just plain stupid—they give you a subsidy, and then you have to pay taxes on the subsidy itself. 🤦

Jerry Martinez6 said:You want to know what's weird? What's weird is that despite all this endless complaining, the Midwest isn't under siege, because apparently money is just growing on trees out there—it's just that Midwesterners are too lazy to go pick it up. That's the real mystery. Go back and actually read this thread from the beginning. If you want real profitability in farming, you have to play the long game for ten years, and it only takes one bad storm to reset your progress back to zero. So please, just get started, and maybe in ten years we can talk about how much cash you've actually made.

Look, if you set aside the subsidies, the political shifts, the idiots running the show, the corruption, the nepotism within import lobbies, the mess at Walmart, and the competition with those massive vineyards in Herzegovina, etc., etc.—just plant something. As far as I'm concerned, I don't care. Pick whatever you think will make a profit and go for it. Plant pineapples for all I care! 🤣
Just stop trying to act like you're smarter than everyone else. Especially now, when land and housing in the Midwest are practically dirt cheap—so cheap that nobody would even buy a shack there 😁 because, you know, there's always some other excuse 😉. If you live off the land, someone's always going to insult you for being a "hillbilly," but if you're out there hustling and cutting corners, then suddenly you aren't a hillbilly (yeah, right 😁). Hard work is a major deterrent to urbanites, and well, we're just built this way, I guess. It's a shame we pushed out all those hardworking folks from the region; they were real farmers. Something might have actually survived thanks to them, since we clearly aren't interested in that kind of life. But hey, we certainly know better than anyone else! If only everyone else knew what we know...

Just keep hustling! 🤣

Exactly. Seriously, go back and read the thread from the beginning, then look at those two really important points I mentioned.

After that, you wouldn't have written such a brainless post.

Anyway, I don't do tourism, nor have I ever. I'm not saying I won't, but in America? Definitely not.

Paul Gonzalez10 said:If you're paying tax on earnings, then those incentives count as income.

So, basically, the incentives aren't taxed, while everything else is.

I mean, that seems fine to me... I don't really get what people find weird about that?

That’s like me saying I have to go into business with a guy selling lemonade on a street corner.

Nothing is mandatory, really. You just have to run the numbers and decide what makes sense for your wallet.

But 70 acres spread over 50 different plots... I honestly don't know how to respond to that without being rude, I guess.

bluetinker54 said:Of course, they're always ready for a little scheme.

Man, you really have a knack for twisting things around. It isn't exactly the same setup for someone whose main bread and butter is livestock and who might just plant 25 acres of Wheat because the straw is useful for feed or part of a crop rotation. For them, the profit on that wheat is peanuts, but they have their own logic for why they're planting it. Then you have someone farming 2,500 or even 10,000 acres who actually makes their living off that grain and uses a completely different scale of technology.

What exactly did I twist?

I laid everything out pretty clearly. If something doesn't make sense, maybe just ask before jumping in with a comment.

I mean, obviously, to do the work, you need the machinery to do it. It takes a real genius to figure that one out, I suppose.

Are you paying taxes on incentives?

It’s honestly so weird, I mean, you really have to pay taxes on all your income and earnings.

Here, have a cookie. 🍿

Paul Gonzalez10 said:I’ve grown zucchini, so I know exactly what they entail. Where did I ever suggest I was losing money on Wheat unless there was some extreme weather event involved? Seriously, try and find that in my posts. Managing 1 acre of Wheat is nothing like managing 70 acres spread across 50 different plots. It's a massive undertaking. I've done zucchini twice, and I've handled 8 different field crops in the past—I still handle 7 today.

Man, seriously, buddy, what do you want me to say after that? Do you need me to draw you a map or something? ☕

Look, subsidies and pensions aren't inherently bad ideas, but I guess people in America have really turned the whole art of cutting corners into a fine science. 😁

bluetinker54 said:Of course there's less manual labor involved. But if you actually want to see a decent return on that investment, you really need to be working with a much larger acreage. And, naturally, you’ll need the right kind of technology to make it all work.

That is just brilliant—so, basically, to drive a nail into a board, you need a hammer, a nail, and a board. Just incredible.

Honestly, I'm stunned.

Wait, hold on a second.

So if you’re looking at 225 $0.00 in subsidies, and you’re claiming it’s not actually that much, does that mean you’re basically losing money on your Wheat?

Look, if Wheat only accounts for 10% of the effort compared to a single hazelnut bush or a grapevine, then I guess you can just take me seriously.

I mean, imagine if I started lecturing you about how cucumbers and zucchini are these incredibly high-maintenance crops that require constant work... and then someone says, "Nah, just relax." Like, no way. In reality, you have to invest, otherwise, all that hard work is just wasted. I suppose that’s the part most people just can't stomach.

You could work yourself to the bone, 365 days a year, but if you don't have irrigation set up for when the plant actually needs water during a dry spell, then everything you did was basically for nothing.

Tourism is way more than just what you put there.

Plus, you wrote those few sentences above, but then you basically ruined them with that last one.

Keep in mind that your buddy wearytrucker22 already mentioned how much he actually works with tourists for the amount of money he listed. I mean, he’s providing an actual service that, practically speaking, takes up his entire day.

Paul Gonzalez10 said:Three disease protections? Are we just waiting for days when the wind isn't blowing? Like, you start spraying, the wind picks up, and you have to pack it in and head home.... then there's insect control, weed control, growth regulators—and in a bad year, you might end up treating the crop four different times from planting through to maturity. Oh, and if an insect infestation hits during the heading stage? You get to spray again. And then you just have to pray to God that after you've done everything perfectly, you don't get hit by a late frost—and that the price stays at least $4.00 for Grade 3 wheat. It's not exactly a walk in the park, is it? Honestly, your take on subsidies is a bit misguided. That money would actually mean something if you weren't paying rent on the land—but where is that rent? $933 What kind of subsidy covers the cost per acre? Basically, you have to be in that lucky 5% who execute everything flawlessly just to break even—and even then, you're banking on decent rainfall and avoiding major storms. Now you'll probably tell me to "just get insurance." Well, I do, but insurance only recognizes damage if the yield drops below 5.5 tons per acre. Meanwhile, I have to chase at least 8 tons per acre just to feel like I actually made a living.
It’s not quite that simple. I'm not trying to lecture you on tourism since that's not my field. But believe me—you have far more than 20 days of work when it comes to wheat....

Then why even grow wheat?

So, basically, you need someone to guarantee your buyback, set the price you want, provide the irrigation, give you the land for free, and bump up the subsidies.

It seems to me like it's always the same people complaining, every single year, it's a bad year. Honestly, it feels like it's just farmers complaining about everything.

Is someone forcing you to do this if it isn't profitable?

bluetinker54 said:Look, man, you clearly don't know the first thing about tourism or the rental market. Honestly, it might be better if you just kept your mouth shut so you don't embarrass yourself.

rowdypilot19 As specified by:
No, I mean they were only protected because they were state-backed, just like those massive government-owned corporations. They’d lock in prices ahead of time, overcharge for everything, and then the companies would just patch up their losses using taxpayer money from the federal budget—nobody actually gave a damn about the consequences.

Of course, when you look at who was actually padding the budget, it was mostly the USA and Russia. Though, if I had to be more precise, it was primarily the USA.
.

I guess you're talking about the old America days? But honestly, what was it like before that? Ever since the mid-1800s, the Midwest has been incredibly rich and fertile—back when we actually had some order brought to us by the Americans—but then for the last 20 years or so, we've just been struggling. And now, with the climate changing, I suppose it means we humans are the ones to blame.

I’m sorry, but I think you’re talking complete nonsense.

wearytrucker22 Asks:
I mean, I guess they probably have to get out there and actually put in the work too—spraying the fields, dealing with all that rot and decay, and then obviously having to go out and buy the seed.
And because of how they’re playing games with the wheat supply, American tourism is going to take a massive hit too, especially since bakery products are such a fundamental part of the experience. You have all these high-end restaurants and local pizza joints that end up having to source their flour from outside suppliers just to keep their doors open.
I honestly don't think you can ever make a decent pizza using American wheat; it just doesn't work. You might get by making some okay bread or maybe even some pastries, but as far as pizza goes, you're just out of luck.

More nonsense. If there's one thing that’s actually true, it's that most of our bakery products are subpar, but you can't exactly pin that on the farmers; the blame lies squarely with the bakers. I mean, if certain bakeries are capable of turning out incredible goods, then others could easily do the same if they actually cared to try. And yeah, I’m well aware that some of our local bakers are importing flour from Mexico just because it’s cheaper, not because it’s any better quality.

And you've gone and started in with the nonsense too.

For all those of you who seem convinced that some farmer is only planting wheat just to chase government subsidies, I’d suggest you go do a little homework. Seriously, try to find the actual breakdown of how many acres are allocated to each specific crop. I’m certain that kind of data is out there somewhere if you actually bother to look for it.

neonhound18 Asks:
That’s exactly why I argued that we need to focus on education. We really have to sit people down and explain that planting a single crop in a monoculture basically ruins the soil. You end up inviting a whole host of diseases, pests, and weeds to move in, which eventually leads to total soil degradation because the humus levels just plummet—mostly because everyone relies so heavily on synthetic fertilizers for grain crops. I could go on and on about that, but you get the idea. 🕺

No self-respecting farmer—someone who actually treats this as a profession rather than just some shady middleman looking for a quick buck—would ever dream of planting crops in a monoculture. That’s just common sense, something my late grandfather drilled into me from day one.

I think this is absolutely spot on.
First of all, let's be clear—not everyone lives within the metropolitan belt. 1.9 miles It’s coming from the coast, too. And honestly, most of the people actually living there don't even have anything available to rent out anymore.

Everything people are saying about agriculture is spot on. Take a place like Pakoštane, for example. Back in the day, everyone there was focused on farming—the land around Lake Vrana is incredibly fertile and productive. But once tourism really took off in the 80s, things shifted completely, and now it seems like almost everyone has just walked away from farming altogether. The prices they get for crops aren't worth the effort anymore, and to make matters worse, the Ornithological Reserve is teeming with birds that end up eating whatever manages to grow. So, you end up with this amazingly rich, fertile soil just sitting there neglected, while the tourism industry continues to boom.

The truth is, investors aren't interested, and finding workers is nearly impossible. Livestock is brutal work; once you decide to raise sheep or goats, you might as well have signed yourself up for a life sentence.

Come on, let's hear from some actual Family Farm owners instead of just the armchair theorists.
The number of Family Farms will naturally dwindle over time because so many of them are essentially "retirement" households. And frankly, their heirs don't see any future or any sense in sticking with agriculture.

No matter how unprofitable it might be, we still need it. It's essential for food and for crop rotation.
The problem is that all these self-proclaimed experts seem to think a farmer just sows wheat and nothing else.

Back then, they had protection—government support, imports weren't easy, and technology wasn't where it is now.

Climate isn't a constant; it changes all the time.

You're starting with the nonsense too.

Not at all, it's always the same people complaining—the ones who expect the government to guarantee everything. Farmers, ranchers, and dairy producers.

Everyone else is doing fine, except maybe olive growers and vineyard owners; those folks in the coastal counties handle a good chunk of production.

No sane farmer (who is a professional and not just some middleman) plants crops in a monoculture. His late grandfather taught him that.

Is it just me, or does that last sentence sound kind of alarming?

That is spot on.
First off, not everyone lives right in that coastal strip 1.9 miles by the ocean. And even for those who do, most people can't find anything to rent anyway.

The stuff about farming is also totally true. Take a place like Pakoštane, for example. They used to be big into agriculture—you've got Lake Vrana nearby and the soil is incredibly fertile—but once tourism took off in the 80s, almost everyone just walked away from farming. The prices aren't worth it, and with the Ornithological Reserve being full of birds, they basically eat everything in sight. So, you end up with this really productive land just sitting there neglected, while tourism is absolutely booming.

In some spots, even just a mile away from the coast, tourists don't want to go anywhere near it... unless, I guess, you happen to own a villa with a pool.

Regarding the farming situation, my family is originally from near Pakoštane, and some of my relatives still do it—mostly vegetables along with some citrus—all alongside their tourism work. There is one cousin who actually started beekeeping, though, and he's doing really well with that.

I keep saying this, but compared to typical Midwest conditions, the plots here are just too small and scattered. Honestly, people would probably just laugh at them.

It’s kind of funny to me how everyone just assumes that if you live by the coast, your whole life revolves around tourism.

My family has always been in farming—basically my entire extended family on my dad's side. And honestly? My relatives make a really solid living by basically playing the agriculture and tourism game at the same time. They tell me, "Oh, we have three houses, it's easy for us." I mean, sure, things are easier now, but let's be real: two out of those three houses were built off farming, and maybe half of one was from tourism.

People just grew whatever made sense to make a buck at the time, you know? So they'd be out there growing cabbage, Swiss chard, spinach, maybe some lettuce here, tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchini, watermelons... you name it.

But if you actually ask them how much land they're working with, about 70% of them have plots like that right behind their houses back in the Midwest.

neonhound18 said:The only issue is crop rotation; you simply cannot plant Wheat in a monoculture indefinitely. 😉

And honestly, that’s the catch for all of them, right? Because once they're done with the Wheat, they actually need to have something else lined up to work on.

rustydriver said:If having fertile farmland is such a massive upgrade over owning vacation rentals, why don't you two (rowdypilot19 and wearytrucker22) just sell everything, move to the Midwest, and go chase those government subsidies?

It’s honestly absurd watching you try to push this narrative that managing an Airbnb is some grueling ordeal. You clean the place once every ten days, hand off the keys to tourists, and collect the cash. Or, if you're feeling lazy, you just hand over 5-10% to a property management agency to handle the whole thing while you sit back and watch the money roll in without lifting a finger.

And then you have the nerve to compare that to agriculture, where you’re grinding for 6 to 9 months a year, putting in well over 100 hours a month just to keep the operation from collapsing. Basically, the rental owners start with an extra 100 hours of free time every month to pick up a second job—or, as is usually the case, to do absolutely nothing. Not to mention that farmers are at the mercy of things they can't control, like the weather. This year was a nightmare with the drought burning everything to a crisp, whereas on the coast, you’ll get rain 70% of the time like you did three years ago. The rental income stays steady regardless.

Then there’s the overhead. You have to till the land constantly using heavy machinery, which means either renting equipment or shelling out a fortune to own it. And at the end of the day, you actually have to sell the product. Most of the time, you're selling at the border just to break even, or sometimes even at a loss. Those subsidies you love to talk about aren't making people rich; they're just keeping them from drowning. That's the reality, despite the story you two are trying to sell.

How can you even put tourism and farming in the same conversation? Look at how something like Ultra in Split works—scammers hike prices by 200% and fill every room without having invested a single cent more than they did last year. When does that happen in farming? When demand outstrips supply—like during this drought when yields dropped by 50%—does the price skyrocket? No. If the local supply is too low, we just import food from other countries, and the domestic farmers still get stuck with the same old prices.

Sure, there’s a fair percentage of people who went bust because they overleveraged themselves on tractors and combines, or simply because the economy tanked. But what really grinds my gears is the attempt to claim that renting out apartments is harder work or less profitable than farming.

Well, I didn't buy farmland, and I don't own any rental units, but I did put some money into this one somewhat alternative kind of farm. I’m actually planning to invest more, I'm just waiting to see if the owner decides to expand again or maybe wants some capital to beef up the warehouse capacity or the silos.

They don't get subsidies.

It honestly feels crazy to me that you guys are trying to push this narrative that it's somehow easier to set up an Airbnb, clean it once every ten days, hand the keys to tourists, and just collect the cash—or better yet, bypass all that by giving 5-10% of the revenue to an agency that handles everything while you literally sit back and watch the money roll in without lifting a finger.

Your ROI is going to be garbage and you'll end up failing in the long run. It all looks great on paper, but the US, for example, has really questionable ROI when it comes to tourism. The real question is whether there even is one, if it actually pays off for citizens, and how much.

That's why, personally, I would never invest in that type of tourism today.

The only way it's "profitable" is if you inherited it or snagged it at a massive discount.

Anyway, I'd bet very few farmers would see a meaningful ROI there either.

And then you compare that to agriculture, where you have to work 6 to 9 months a year, like 100+ hours a month, if you don't want everything to fall apart. So, those folks with rental properties basically start out with an extra 100 hours a month they can use for a second job, or, as is often the case, just doing nothing at all. I won't even mention that farmers are at the mercy of things they can't control, like weather—like this year, where we had a massive drought and everything just scorched, whereas on the coast, it might rain 70% of the time like it did three years ago, so they still have steady income.

What crops are you even talking about? One farmer I knew told me he worked 30 acres of wheat and it only took him about 12 days of work for the whole year. Back then, he understood why wheat is so cheap; you practically have nothing to do.

As for droughts... well, it's like Israel gets rain whenever they need it. ☕

It's funny how farmers in the Sinisco field don't seem to have issues with droughts.

Besides, you have to till all that land constantly using heavy machinery, which means you either have to rent the equipment and pay someone else to run it, or own it yourself. And at the end of the day, you have to sell the product to someone, and most often it's sold at the border just to cover costs, or sometimes even below cost, and that's where those subsidies come in to save them—not so they can live like kings, which is the story you two are trying to push.

So, I mean, with vacation rentals, people basically just rent them out when they see the cash in hand; they aren't really accounting for much else, just take the money and go. That’s the big difference, I guess—those who own rentals actually manage to sell their product. Not everyone is making crazy money, though. Some are, some aren't, so you might be wrong if you think everyone is just raking in massive piles of cash.

Last year, I spent some time at this one farm out in the Midwest, where they grow hazelnuts on less than 25 acres. This guy... he actually has a nicer car than I do, all sorts of heavy machinery, and his house is huge and really well kept. Honestly, his vacation home feels more like a primary residence than a getaway. He’s debt-free and living the dream. He even helps out his kids financially whenever things get tight.

Basically, it’s doable.

How can you even compare tourism to agriculture? Like, look at Ultra in Split—they hike prices by 200% and fill everything up without having invested a single cent more than what they were charging before. When does that happen in farming? Only when demand outweighs supply (like during a drought when yields drop by 50%). But even then, if there's a shortage, we just import food from other countries, and the local farmers' prices stay stuck right where they were.

I mean, not every city is Split, and not every town has an Ultra. Split is pretty much just now discovering what tourism can do, so during this boom, it feels like everything is top-tier and everyone is swimming in money. But really, it’s mostly just going to the most capable people.

Sure, there’s a decent percentage of people who went bust because they bought unnecessary tractors and combines, or just because of the recession itself, but it really bothered me when someone tried to claim that renting out apartments is harder work or less profitable than farming.

The ROI on the farm I invested in was actually higher than the ROI I could have gotten from tourism. Though, I guess tourism is a way riskier investment overall.

Noah Sullivan said:For hundreds of years, they were considered the hardest workers around, and now, suddenly, they’re labeled "lazy"—doesn't that strike you as a bit suspicious? Look, the reality is that their products (along with a massive array of other goods) simply aren't competitive under current conditions—given an overvalued currency and sky-high interest rates on loans.
Those who *are* actually competitive under these constraints should be rewarded with higher margins,
rather than watching the majority of domestic production wither away while a few barely scrape by. Farmers, for instance, should be receiving low-interest loans stemming directly from primary Federal Reserve emissions, instead of being blamed for failing to compete with those who are profiting from cheap money pumped out by the European Central Bank.

The fault lies, quite clearly, in a nonsensical monetary policy—one that has remained fixed since 1994 despite nothing but poor results.

No, it's more like they're just protected by the government, kind of like those state-owned companies. You know, prices are set in advance, products get overpaid for, and companies just get patched up using the budget... nobody really cared.

And of course, the budget was mostly filled up by the USA and Russia. Well, mostly the USA, specifically.

wearytrucker22 said:You're absolutely right—it hasn't been easy. One single slip-up and one bad review can tank the whole operation. My original plan was to pull in about $6,000 to $7,000 per season. But if you spot a gap in the market and put the work in, you've basically broken even on your initial investment between this year and last. Now, I’ve identified a specific niche paying anywhere from $1,250 to $1,500 a day. Moving forward...

I just spotted an opportunity to pull in about $1,300 to $1,600 a day, but there’s a catch: you need at least $650,000 in capital—or a massive loan—to get off the ground. Honestly, that kind of debt is a joke to ask of regular folks. I’m personally not diving into this until I’ve scraped together 80% to 90% of the cash myself. I say that as a nod to those people out in the Midwest asking for loans just to start production. Sure, getting a bank loan is easy, but you actually have to pay it back, and nobody is giving you any guarantees once things go south. Taking a loan isn't a handout; if you don't have your own skin in the game, you're basically throwing money into the wind and setting yourself up for total ruin. If you don't have the funds, just pack up and head to Denmark to work on some pig farm. Get your experience and build up enough seed money to cover at least 30% of the investment—not counting the land, obviously. When you're playing with your own hard-earned cash, the psychology is completely different than when you're gambling with someone else's money.

Here’s how you actually make it in some small Midwest town with maybe 100 to 500 people.

Get together at some house, grab a beer, and round up your fellow citizens.
Let's get a farming collective off the ground.
Let's get an inventory of the machinery together.
Compile a list of core competencies. You have to know everything—and frankly, you need to understand agricultural production better than any of the competition in the European Union. It’s like how people from Southern California just inherently know how to grow the perfect mandarins or watermelons.
Compile a land registry list.
So, let's say you all decide to pool your resources and jump into large-scale production together—we're talking about hitting a target of, say, 1,000 tons of vegetables.
So, you want a full-scale vegetable harvest schedule mapped out a year in advance, including specific quantities? Fine. Let’s get down to business. You can't just wander into the garden in July and hope for the best; that's how you end up with nothing but dirt and regret. If you want to actually feed people—or at least have enough to stock a pantry—you need a roadmap. Here is how you structure a professional-grade planting and harvest master plan for an American backyard or small farm setup. **Phase 1: The Inventory & Goal Setting (The "What" and "How Much")** Before you touch a shovel, you need to know your numbers. Don't guess. * **Define your yield targets:** Are we talking about feeding a family of four for the summer, or are we trying to preserve enough canned goods to last through a Midwestern winter? * **Calculate by weight or volume:** Instead of saying "I want tomatoes," say "I need 50 pounds of tomatoes." That dictates whether you plant three plants or twenty. * **Analyze your zone:** This isn't one-size-fits-all. Your plan for a garden in Florida is going to look nothing like a plan for a garden in Maine. Determine your USDA Hardiness Zone immediately. **Phase 2: The Seasonal Breakdown (The Timeline)** You need to divide your year into three distinct operational windows. **1. The Early Spring Push (Frost to Late May)** * **Focus:** Cold-hardy crops. Think peas, spinach, radishes, and kale. * **The Math:** These grow fast. If you need 5 lbs of radishes, you can plant them in waves every two weeks to ensure a continuous supply rather than one massive, overwhelming harvest. * **Action:** Get your soil prep done in late February/early March. **2. The Summer Heat Wave (June to August)** * **Focus:** The heavy hitters. Tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, corn, and squash. * **The Math:** This is where your quantity calculations matter most. Corn takes up significant real estate for relatively low caloric density per square foot compared to, say, potatoes. Plan your acreage accordingly. * **Action:** Stagger your plantings. Don't put all your tomato starts in the ground on the same day unless you want 40 pounds of tomatoes rotting on your porch all at once in July. **3. The Autumn Harvest (September to November)** * **Focus:** Root vegetables and brassicas. Carrots, beets, garlic (which gets planted in the fall for next year), and broccoli. * **The Math:** Garlic requires a massive lead time. You plant it now to reap the rewards next summer. * **Action:** This is your cleanup and preservation phase. **Phase 3: Creating the Master Spreadsheet** To do this right, you need a document with these columns: 1. **Crop Name** 2. **Target Quantity** (lbs/oz) 3. **Estimated Yield per Plant** (Research this; don't wing it) 4. **Number of Plants Needed** (Target Quantity ÷ Yield per Plant = Number of Plants) 5. **Planting Date** (Based on your local frost dates) 6. **Expected Harvest Window** **The Bottom Line:** If you aren't calculating based on the actual yield of a single plant, you aren't planning—you're just wishing. Do the math, account for the inevitable pests or a random July drought, and build in a 15% buffer. That’s the only way to actually succeed.
If you can find someone truly capable, send them out across the US and the coastlines to hammer out deals with shopping malls and the big corporations that supply hotels and everything else.
Look, if you’ve got inventory that got trashed because of some crazy weather hitting your supply chain right after you signed a sales contract, don't just sit there staring at the loss. If you actually want to run a business, go out and buy the stock on the open market instead. Grab it, get it moved, and deliver it to your customers five or ten minutes before the deadline hits. That's how you handle it.
Success is a total guarantee if you can pull off 1,000 tons of organic produce every single day. You negotiate the deals now, deliver next year, and you’ll have everything sold off to the Mediterranean market without a single hitch.

Eh, if that’s your only risk, well, I guess... but that isn't really the point here. I don't want to go off on a long tangent, but tourism is pretty much the most sensitive sector we've got.

Hitting a price point like that isn't easy, honestly—not even for a single hotel. I guess you could say it takes some serious skill and a lot of upfront investment to pull it off.

If he was dealing with an old house from the 70s or 80s, he would have had to, at the very least, tear down all the walls and start over to offer a rate like that.

You want to know how people actually manage to hit those numbers? Of course you don't.

To be totally honest, charging 100 euros per bed for a quad room is a massive win, and you really have to give the guy credit for that.

At the end of the day, if he wasn't hosting Britons, there probably wouldn't even be any incentive to do it.

That's really just for furnishing the rental, you know? If they were starting with an old house, it probably cost them way more because the layout was just terrible for making it work like that.

Personally, I’d trade a €110k apartment for 35 acres of prime farmland in a heartbeat.

I honestly don't get why everyone acts like they're experts on rentals when they clearly don't have a clue about modern farming or how the market actually works.

Just imagine the sales potential you could have with this kind of tourism... and of course, the Midwest is struggling. Or, well, it's already gone downhill, except for maybe that 1-2% of smart, capable people who are actually making serious money from agriculture.

Honestly, I guess that $40k+ investment in the apartment turned out to be a blessing in disguise for him. ☕

I mean, obviously, they’re just trying to push this narrative on anyone who isn't in the loop, and I guess that includes these surveys too. Then, most likely, they'll just turn around and sell off whatever info they can get their hands on. I mean, the more data they grab, the more cash they make, right?

Look, I'm not saying your way of fighting this isn't okay—that's totally your right. It’s just... I don't know, I wonder if there's actually any point to it all.

I don't even mean it in terms of whether you'll change things, more like... why fight against something if you don't actually want to put in the work to win?

To really go after something like this, you're gonna need:

1. Patience
2. Time
3. Money
4. Knowledge

I mean, you *can* take on the system—there are plenty of examples out there—but I just, I don't think you're really built for it.

First off, the patience thing. You just don't have it. If waiting three or four hours is already too much for you while you're supposedly fighting for something, then maybe you don't actually want to fight at all. Maybe you just like venting on forums because things aren't going your way. I mean, man, you stepped onto their turf, and by being so impatient, you're basically forcing yourself to play by their rules.

Then there's time. I don't know if you even have it, but honestly, if you're working a standard 40-hour week in the States, unless you stop sleeping entirely, you just don't have the time. Fighting the system like this takes, what, like 20 hours a day? It's intense.

And money... that's huge. Most people don't have it. I'm not saying you need millions, but if you don't have, say, $2,000 set aside this month for lawyers, lawsuits, and all that, you aren't really doing anything.

As for knowledge, based on what you've written, you're missing the basics. Even with that survey, you filled it out yourself when you shouldn't have, and you didn't even know how to lay out the details needed to make them do what they're supposed to do—which is actually pretty simple once you get it.

For instance, I know people living abroad who don't even have a local ID, yet they have zero issues getting their old savings paid out after they expire. My own family had a situation like this about two years ago. So, it's not that it's impossible, it's just that you didn't know how to present your case. The person I mentioned? They got their cash right in their hands. See? It can be done.

The real issue is that you aren't even ready for a basic debate with someone who knows what they're talking about, let alone taking on the entire system. I mean, if you had a friend who was a lawyer, wouldn't you have thought to bring them along or at least asked them for advice on what to say in the moment?

If anything in my post is confusing, feel free to ask, but I think I've explained, as briefly as I can, why the stuff you're posting doesn't really seem to add up to me.

The thing is, the real issue here is that you didn't actually tell them what you needed in the first place.

You never mentioned having that second account over at a different bank, so... I mean, how are they supposed to know? It’s not like they have mind readers on staff, and obviously, that’s why they couldn't process your payment.

I guess JPMorgan Chase might be one of the biggest headaches on the market right now, but honestly, looking at this whole situation, you're kind of more at fault than anyone else.

Anyway, like someone already pointed out to you, you're basically asking for trouble by not having a personal account. If things go sideways because of that, you'll probably end up back here complaining, even though you already know the fix.

The Department of City Planning and Public Works really ought to be called something like "The Department You Actually Need" or some other much more honest title.

Usually, you’d want to track down the department head.

But, I mean, whatever—just head over to the local City Hall and ask around there. Honestly, even the guy at the front desk should probably know where to point you.

I don't even know which municipality you're dealing with, but... yeah, just a heads-up, I wouldn't count on getting this sorted out in like two or three weeks. It usually takes way longer than that.