Just thinking about Winnipeg...

[chuckChuck]

Silverback's post illustrates a point about many of the arguments put forth by those who don't like the CWB.

Without a shred of evidence Silverback speculates about a whole lot of extra money or benefits going to CWB employees. Pretty typical of the BS and irrational arguments put forth by many posters on agriville.

What about the benefits and salaries in the private and public companies that are about to take over the grain trade in Western Canada? Any concerns there Silverback?

You know very well that the compensation to the top executives at the CWB pales in comparison to the corporate grain trade. Or perhaps you don't know this?

Next time you bring up bogus arguments designed to discredit the CWB, you might want to consider that your lack of analysis, comparisons, or actual evidence, illustrates very well your lack of fairness and understanding of the issues.

Making irrational and over the top accusations may play well to your agriville friends but in the real world your accusations are just hot air with no substance.

[jdepape]

chuckChuck:

I think Silverback’s post illustrates very well his mistrust of all things “CWB”. The fact that, after all that has been said and done by the CWB, you think the CWB is above reproach shows your blind faith in all things “CWB”.

Perhaps you should focus on his main point:
“Is there anyone out there really overseeing the day to day operations of this behemoth that is not interested in it's survival at all costs?”

Can you address that one, chuckChuck? I think we can all answer it; sadly, the answer isn’t comforting. And that – I think – is where Silverback is coming from. He’s not at all comfortable with the approach the CWB has taken or is now taking.

By the way – his post did not make one “accusation” as you suggest. All questions. Questions that show the CWB has not won his trust or support.

Perhaps that’s the main problem here. The CWB and its supporters have done nothing to unite farmers – in fact, quite the opposite. Its legacy will be an intense polarization of the farm community. The irony here is that the whole idea of the CWB is the co-operative ideal of working together.

It should sadden all CWB supporters that it failed at its most basic level.

[chuckChuck]

Jdepape. I didn't say I blindly trust the CWB did I? But I have more trust in the management and the farmer elected Board of Directors to make the right decisions on behalf of the majority of producers.

Unlike the private and public companies that will take over, I get a vote on who becomes a director of the CWB. Perhaps you don't agree with many of the Directors, but the majority of voters who elected them must think their oversight has value.

You must be under the impression/delusion that everything that the private sector does, has the best interests of producers in mind. Private and public companies are responsible to their shareholders first not producers.

Again you are blaming the CWB for a political decision by the current government. This issue has been polarized since the beginning. Private grain traders never wanted the CWB to survive. If the CWB single desk was so bad, how did it manage to survive so long under various Liberal and Conservative governments? It did so because of farmer support. That support has been eroded because later generations of farmers are listening to critics like yourself and others who are aligned with private companies and favour a free market approach.

You are entitled to your perspective, but it is clearly not shared by the majority of producers who have elected the majority of Directors who favour the single desk.

This issue comes down to politics. One side wants to hand the grain trade over to the multinational traders. The other side wants to keep it in the hands of farmers.

Any debate about the effectiveness and performance of the CWB needs to be done in comparison with the performance and effectiveness of the private trade.

Simply comparing the performance of non-board crops and US market prices with the CWB doesn't tell the whole story.

[bucket]

CHUCKCHUCK

Most of the cwb's work is done by the multinationals already. And they get paid very well to do it. Its called the accreditted exporter program.

And if you believe and trust the current cwb directors why has all these wind up costs and contract commitment costs come up now. They have made no mention of the contracts they have made at any other time.

And look at the costs associated with them. WHO do you think were paying the costs if this hadn't come to a head now???

Think man.

[lakenheath]

ChuckChuck (Rod Flaman)

You said, "You are entitled to your perspective, but it is clearly not shared by the majority of producers who have elected the majority of Directors who favour the single desk"

What a complete crock of $%&T! On my 5,000 acre farm 1 vote went anti-wheat board and 4 votes went pro-wheat board. I am a 33 year old farmer. I produce all the grain, make all the decisions and take all the risk. My 75 year landlord, my 85 year old landlords, and others i rent land from are flush with money and in 100% retirement mode. They are not farmers nor claim to be farmers yet they were mailed ballots becuase they are on my permit book.

So don't feed me this line of BS that farmer have elected the current directors.

I have heard of single producers getting up to 6 votes etc. The CWB election system is flawed and it is a complete joke. Yet you and likes of Oberg cling to the results of these bastardized elections.

[parsley]

chuckchuck:

It's not about comparing size, or cash, or bushels. or how loaded your halfton is.

I could care less.

It's about me taking my pail of barley and being able to do as I please with it. Market it for less money than you are able to get, and enjoy the cheque more than you do.

I don't care what you sell your grain for.

I don't care how clever the CWB marketing whiz played the game in Minneapolis that piddled away your Board millions.

I just don't want a joint marketing marriage with you. A joint pooling account. A joint Earthy Farm. Or share a joint with you.

I want to own my property that I grow. Sell it. Spend the money. And not even have a conversation with you, let alone have some half-wit deduct from my cheque.

Not a difficult concept if you read it twice. Pars

[Braveheart]

Amen Parsley. Any talk about performance of the CWB vs open market is just smoke. If a hundred people grew wheat 99 of them don't have the right to tell the last one what he or she has to do with their wheat.

Back to the original post, I've heard that some board employees are already moving on. JRI has reportedly hired some people from 423 Main and other companies are raiding as well.

By the way Pars, I don't smoke, but if you bake some of those special borwnies I'd sure share some with you.

[TOM4CWB]

ChuckChuck,

In 2000 Monsanto lost the Patent protection on Glyphosate. They had a MONOPOLY till then.

Instead of Monsanto packing it in and saying it was impossible to operate in a the 'dual market'... Monsanto powered through the competition and today are stronger than they were in 2000. Roundup at $5/litre or $3.

Sure you can buy at $2.50 with no warranty or service.

Chairman Oberg and your buddies have done nothing but waste 'good will' and reck customer loyalty on both buyer and seller ends. PLUS open the CWB to trade action by claiming the CWB dumped 1mmt of high quality/px DNS quality into the US at an $80/t discount!

So... what was the Canadian price our millers paid... one must assume on the same scale as US millers got the wheat.

Where was this in VP Gord Flaten's magical mystery tour of the CWB 'single buying desk'?

Starts at 56 seconds in... CWB VP of Sales Flaten:

[chuckChuck]

So to all the posts who claim freedom is the issue, why did you likely vote for a government that supports supply managed marketing boards for dairy and poultry products? Where is the freedom in import tarifs restricting competition, cost of production calculations , quota, fixed prices?

By many measures Canada is one of the wealthiest countries in the world and farmers here are some of the best paid and successful. So constantly whineing that you have to work within the CWB with other farmers in a single desk marketing program with numerous cash pricing options is a little rich.

[parsley]

Many, many farmers have fought against supply management with candidates, and political parties, and governments.

Jack would have supply-managed your visits to his spa to enjoy a ground wheat body wrap. The NDP would supply manage farms if they had enough support.

Some political parties want to plan your entire life for you. Cradle to grave. They will do it if we allow them, because their benefits are, yes, pension plans and perks and salaries.

All of them get greedy fat.

The problem is, Ontario and Quebec have a grip on votes cast. Eastern farmers also supply Eastern cities. You don't imagine they want chuckchuck's cream hitting the aisles in Toronto, do you?

So they vote to keep their little fiefdom. The Conservatives have maintained their milkmanaging, but not without a battle from within.

And it will continue.

[chuckChuck]

Hey Tom,Thanks for supporting the arguments in favour of a single desk by giving us the Monsanto example.

So Roundup was over $20 per litre when it first came out and now you can buy glyphosphate for $2.50 after Monsanto lost its patent monopoly. Tom,you seemed to have missed the obvious point of this example.

Tom what happened to the price of Roundup/glyphosphate when Monsanto lost its' patent monopoly and had to compete with multiple sellers? The price dropped Tom!! It is now a mere fraction of the original price.

Weren't you trying to argue that prices would be higher with multiple sellers in an open market?

So how low do you think farmers will have to price their grain in an open market to be successful like Monsanto Tom?

You and many others are so damn obsessed with attacking the CWB your ability to present coherent rational arguments is limited by your obsession.

When in doubt resort to the freedom argument like parsley does all the time.

[chuckChuck]

Parsley,
Who in the Conservative party caucus is openly criticizing supply management? If your policy is freedom for farmers then compulsory marketing boards such as supply management should be gone. It is such a joke to hear Ritz talk about bringing freedom to farmers by ending the CWB monopoly while his support for supply management continues.

So when did greed become the domain of only of public sector? Have you not heard the news yet about the investment bankers on Wall Street who were bailed out by their government only to continue paying themselves fat bonuses.

Why are you not concerned about the greed that goes on in the private sector Parsley? Is it because they earned their bonuses through hard work and because they are smarter than the rest of us?

You seem to blindly put your faith only in the market economy. Why are/were Canadian banks in better financial shape than US banks coming through the last recession? Primarily because Canadians have better banking regulations than the US.

It must be true because Harpo said so.