So Alberta is Going to Save the Day! Ha HA.

[newguy]

I believe every farmer in Canada should have the same right. That is a Human rights issue. In Canada even minorities have rights!!!

[silverback]

It would be almost impossible for me to label someone a nazi so don't throw that out there.

On the other hand, in my mind anyone who advocates shared resources and equal outcomes for all shares the same values and philosophy as my definition of communism.

Oh yeah, and if you are ok with letting the government and police put your neighbors in jail for trying to do what they feel is best for their family and situation, you might be a communist.

Now the definition of Marxism is?...

[wd9]

I'll try asking again. Would having the CWB alone be enough by it marketing and pooling grain and sharing the proceeds of sale the same for those who use that service or do you feel 'making' everyone (by everyone i mean a select group singled out in Canada) deal with the CWB thru the power of the monopoly?

What is important to you?

I think leaving racial slurs, moms, and personal comments out and focus on the issue at hand is prudent.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9;

You are spoiling all our fun!

If by now you didn't get it...

This is not about logic.

This is not about the highest returns to growers who grow grain in the 'designated area'.

The CWB is a handy tool to supply consumers with cheap grain. Canadian, US, EU, African, South American... and maybe even a few in the Middle East, India... and then for the mother of all Communists; CHINA.

[oneoff]

And I think its futile to debate with you the matters of any of you doing absolutely anything you think necessary for your family; or your right to freedom from the CWB etc. etc. Those are not necessarily examples of rights. If they were; you wouldn't have nearly the problems we all have exercising them. People can be so blinded by their crusade; that they no longer see the laws and regulations which are the basis of the current democracy. And yes it is extremely probable that if you did get your way; that more serious problems would ensue.
And yes I believe in; ; strive for and hold out hope for a more functional democracy. Probably to a greater degree than just about any other poster. Calling me a communist is untrue; and doesn't hurt a bit. I like the word socialist because of its effect on red necked welfare bums. But democracy is our best hope and can be very difficult for wannabe dictators both big and small. The necessary slowness of changes can indeed be a source of frustration to us all. But we do get the governments we deserve; and eventually the will of the majority will be relected in our society.

[wd9]

Guess there is no point asking again.

[Choice2U]

I guess Oneoff would have just been Mr. Happy in the old USSR where the Communist Party held all the seats and those that were not party members had no vote. The Communist party had a democratically elected leader and by Oneoff's definition, he would have had absolutely no reason to complain had he been a commoner but had he been a party member.....Oh, wait, he said he was not a communist. It only took from 1918 to 1989 to fix that type of democracy (71 years). Ironic how the CWB democracy is 71 years old this year. Please don't critique my dates as they might be off a few years.

[oneoff]

Jut because you have a vote; doesn,t at all mean you get your way.
Everyone can'tget their way at the same time.
You pretend to defend democracy and live your lives unsatisfied with the ststem supposedly failing you. Well that about as good as it will ever get.
As for the conflict between CWB and your freedom; why isn't democracy working for you today?
Still not a communist; but tell me what you are?

[wd9]

I don't understand the question.

[checking]

Stands to reason. That's usually what happens when you become humble!!

[oneoff]

And because of our democratic system; the sum total of the majority usually get their way. As you are/will learn/learning; you won't necessarily get what you want; and may even be dished out exactly the opposite of what is in your own interest. If you don't like that system; then quit being hypocritical; because democracy is working just as it should; and you really should start supporting something else. Now what is your position on that matter?
In summary; don't tell me you believe in democracy; and then immediately point out how it isn't working for you today.

[TOM4CWB]

Oneoff,

Democracy with out a Constitution and Rights and Freedoms of the individual spelled out is simple'Mob Law'.

This is what the Magna Carta and years of Common Law set out to create the base line that the Commonwealth Nations are based upon. French 'Admiralty Law' is another system that creates a tighter social democracy.

Here are the rules/baseline law system that were set out in the 1800's and first half of the 1900's.

Common Law:
1. Do unto others as you would have done unto you,
And the Negative Golden Rule, which states;
Do not do unto others as you would not have others do unto you;

2. The two fundamental principles of common law:

*Do not infringe upon the Rights, Freedoms or Property of others, and

*Keep all contracts willingly, knowingly and intentionally.


3. These maxims in common law which include:

a) That for every wrong there is a remedy,

b) The end does not justify the means,

c) Fundamental principals cannot be set aside to meet the demands of convenience or to prevent apparent hardship in a particular case,

d) Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law,

e) Two wrongs do not make a right, and

f) One can enlarge the rights of the people; however they cannot be taken away without their informed consent.

When I deal with democratic rights... these laws stated above are the base line ethical standards which my judgements need to stand by... in the Commonwealth tradition.

[wd9]

Seems to me Alberta did this democratically, and the CWB lost. I believe that the government really should do what the majority of the people in AB ask. Yet they have not. So according to you oneoff, this is democratic? Which is why i don't understand your question.

Good response Tom4. Saves me writing it all out and believe as you do.

The biggest problem i think is the monopoly may not be worth saving because it lacks any proof positive data to the contrary, rather the opposite. Its a one sided monopoly of acquisition of grain from a select group of shackled farmers, but when it comes to sales, it lacks power, infrastructure, and the desire to profit like most government run organizations and competes with the rest of the Canadian farmers not in its grip.

It would actually be democratic if ALL canadian farmers were in it and there was actually a vote, keep or don't keep the monopoly enacted. What we have now is definitely not democratic. If the farmers voted on a yes no ballot, was counted, and the government actually acted on the majority response, then that would be democratic.

Seperation by Quebec is a great example. They had a vote, seperatists lost, quebec stayed. But it is also the democratic right of the seperatists to push for another vote. This issue is the same thing, except we never get to vote.

I still don't understand what you specifically are asking.