Top ten reasons the CWB plebiscite will prove nothing

[sumdumguy]

I think we all could guess the results that will be
published, whether they are factual or ethical is
another story.

[chuckChuck]

John, from your previous post below I have a question or two.

Am I to understand you are not in favour of taxation? If the personal dollars you earn are taxed as personal income is this not a decision by one group to decide how another group manages their property?

And what about the dairy farmers and poultry farmers, do they not impose their marketing board system on all farmers? What about Michael Schmidt (raw mill producer) who wants to be outside the supply management system that is supported by the current Conservative government?

Also you can choose not to use the CWB simply by growing non CWB crops.


Your quote:
"Still voting to allow one group to decide how another group manages their personal property.

Can someone please explain why that makes any sense at all."

[Burbert]

ANOTHER FEEBLE ATTEMPT TO PROVE EVERYTHING
CWB IS TRASH, open market is good. Say it
enough times and the masses, may actually
begin to believe it. Go Angriville, go!!
Us Comedians sure need your input fer our
everyday decisions and planning!!!!

[silverback]

The wheat board is a tax.

It takes away from the true value of the grain it handles.

However, for some ungodly reason it is only imposed on the farmers from 3 provinces in western Canada!

There is no justification for that no matter how hard you spin it chuck.

[checking]

Please list the special deals in the supply management system of Canada that some of its members have over others. I'm drawing a blank.

Now list the special deals for special groupings that support the CWB. Into what special section do you fall, chuckchuck?

[chuckChuck]

Checking, as far as I know Quebec gets more dairy quota per capita than Saskatchewan. Not to mention there are different rules for dairy and poultry in each Province. So why do you and the Cons still support supply management if it is not applied equally?

[jdepape]

chuckChuck:

I assume by your questions that your position is that it makes sense to tell others how they need to manage their business. I don’t. You’ll never convince me otherwise, and I’m pretty sure I’ll never convince you either.

Since you brought it up, I don’t support supply management either.

Also - taxation is for a “public good”, not a “private good”. There’s a big difference that seems to be lost on most CWB supporters.

You say farmers may choose to not use the CWB by growing non CWB crops. The trouble with this argument is that all crops suffer from the single desk – it’s a very narrow view to think you can get away from it by simply growing non CWB crops. Did you read how the pulse industry is concerned about the removal of the single desk because it believes it will lose acres to wheat? Canola crushers too have acknowledged that crush margins are expected to shrink (as they will need to pay more to compete with wheat acres, movement and pricing). The obvious flip-side to this is that, with the single desk, more peas and canola were being grown, and less wheat, than would have been in an open market.

The tables are being turned somewhat. Now the CWB supporters are being told how they will be marketing their wheat – without the single desk. They don’t like being told – they want to do it their way. Which is why I find the argument for mandatory marketing by a vote so ridiculous.

When it comes to personal business, everyone is in agreement - nobody wants to be told how – regardless of the side of the debate you’re on. The only argument that is consistent with that is the argument for freedom.

The argument for the single desk goes something like this – you’re not going to tell me how to market, but I’m going to tell you.

[farm_boy]

After being intensely involved in this debate and working towards an open market for quiote some time, I have not followed this forum for a couple years. Reading through this again makes me very tired for the guys who have stuck with it, and my hats off to them. I am so looking forward to the day when marketing of one's personal property can be done without the baggage of a monopsonistic regime (it is not a monopoly).

I agree with depape and others - how does it make any sense where the vote of some poorly construed body has the right to make a choice for me and my personal property? It's actually quite ludicrous when you think about it. Stakeholding farmers are so much broader than just those who have delivered to the CWB recently. Many farmers haven't grown CWB grains for a long time because they don't want to be forced to deal with them - yet they are still stakeholders.

It's too bad that the CWB can't embrace the opportunities that exist and strive to be a leader.

[checking]

Chuckchuck.

I don't know how you equate the present happenings befalling the CWB with supply management. A parallel would be a pencil-pen thing. All I see is oil-water. If there were any of the former, why is it only your limited chatter, and not a tide of dissent from the livestock chat rooms saying something is wrong?

I'm also a rotten example of a supporter of supply management. At every cross border opportunity I bring back my custom allowed maximum allotment of ND eggs and turkeys. It's a nice exemption every Canadian has, not an overly greedy one IMO, that allows all of us to buy outside a Board mandated price. I can't remember the last time I home fried a Canadian egg!

Your problem is that you haven't convinced enough of your like minded cohorts that you should be allowed in on the selling side, or is this just philosophy to you?

I'd suggest that you don't piss on our parade on the grain side that enough of us have finally convinced a government, (if they needed convincing), and even if we didn't support that government with a vote, to free up marketing of cereals. It was the right thing to do to void a bunch of this "special" Store In High Transit status going on in the CWB.