Story about Viterra grading problems in Australia

[chuckChuck]

This issue is all about politics.

Rational,fair debate and an examination of the issues has long left the room.

Those who oppose the CWB basically want farmer input into the grain industry removed. They are fully prepared to hand all the power over to the multinationals and railways.

I am not blindly prepared to give it all away because why would any corporation that is mandated to maximize returns for shareholders give a rats ass about what happens to farmers as long as they continue to make money.

Farmers have been exiting the industry worldwide because of poor returns with or without the CWB. For a number of reasons. If it wasn't for direct subsidies or through supply management most Canadian farmers would be losing money or have very poor returns.

[chuckChuck]

Weber,
When have you ever debated any of the economists I have mentioned in a detailed public forum?

Why would you expect me to explain the work of KFT, Gray, Schmitz?

All I need to do is read their conclusions.

Academics have to back up their work and defend their work in front of their peers.

Where are your peer reviewed papers on the subject?

What are your qualifications? Do you have Phd in Ag Econ?

Do you not stand to benefit in an open market?

Supply management is part of ag. policy in this country. So is the CWB. What we have is an incoherant inconsistent ag policy in this country. Why is that not an issue worth discussing?

Why are their two classes of farmers, one protected by tarrifs and supply mangement and the rest of us. Why not bring back a domestic price for grains protected with tarrifs as well? If it increases dairy farm incomes why not for grains?

So I take it you want GM wheat even when the majority of our customers don't want it? Why doesn't the US introduce GM wheat first? What are they waiting for? Did you learn anything from the flax fiasco?

[LWeber]

You lamented on another post about GM wheat. It indicates that you are on the outside looking in, naive or disingenuous?

Which is it?

Answer this question, I will ponder answering yours...

[chuckChuck]

Weber I don't get your point on GM wheat.

Name me one business that trys to sell something to customers that don't want it? And when they say they don't want the product, tells them they are wrong and stupid and we know better.

The CWB played an important role in identifying the lack of demand for GM wheat. And the consequences of contaminating the whole supply.

Want to lose alot of customers for Canadian wheat? Just introduce GM wheat!

You can bet that pretty soon after the CWB one company will say we can contract GM wheat for our customer and keep it separate. Don't worry we have customers who want it.

If you think that is a good idea then you are a fool.

[chuckChuck]

Tipsy, Vos is entitled to his opinion but because he didn't see the advantage to net returns doesn't mean it wasn't there. There are 8 directors that did see the advantage along with CEO. Are they all wrong?

[LWeber]

Outside looking in and naive.
Best poll your board pals again.
This is not 2003.

[jdepape]

chuckChuck:

I know you asked Larry these questions, but I’d like to take a shot at them. (I’d also like your response to my questions about plagiarizing economists.)

"When have you ever debated any of the economists I have mentioned in a detailed public forum?"

Never – but I’m more than willing to.

"Why would you expect me to explain the work of KFT, Gray, Schmitz?"

Because if you're going to hold them up to some sort of gold standard, it only makes sense that you would know enough about them and their methodology and analysis to defend them. Otherwise you are showing your ideology – putting them out there as all-knowing oracles without anything to back your position except that you like their message.

"All I need to do is read their conclusions."

Really? Even when some of those conclusions are mine? (I wrote the 2004 Sparks barley study – you know, the one Schmitz, Schmitz and Gray copied.) You still trust these guys knowing they cheat? With all due respect, what does that say about you?

"Academics have to back up their work and defend their work in front of their peers."

Wrong. Only if they are submitting their work to be published in their association’s journal – like the Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics. Not one of the CWB-commissioned studies you refer to have ever been “peer-reviewed”. I think it was Andy Schmitz that said that peer review would be impossible because these "studies" deal with confidential information. So even the academics themselves confirm that their work is NOT peer-reviewed.

"Where are your peer reviewed papers on the subject?"

www.cwbmonitor.blogspot.com Not peer-reviewed as you see it, but all these analyses are completely open with data and information sources provided and discussion welcomed. And I often have academics contact me to discuss and give their thumbs up. I welcome any and all open debates.

"What are your qualifications? Do you have Phd in Ag Econ?"

Is that the only pre-requisite? Funny, the criticism aimed at me for what I write often comes with “Are you a farmer?”

For the record - I am not a farmer nor do I have a PhD. I have a bachelor degree in agriculture (BSA) and a Masters in Business Administration (MBA) in Agri-business. Since we're sharing, what are your qualifications?

"Do you not stand to benefit in an open market?"

We all do – even you.

"Supply management is part of ag. policy in this country. So is the CWB. What we have is an incoherant inconsistent ag policy in this country. Why is that not an issue worth discussing?"

It is. I’m surprised you don’t think it is being discussed.

"Why are their two classes of farmers, one protected by tarrifs and supply mangement and the rest of us. Why not bring back a domestic price for grains protected with tarrifs as well? If it increases dairy farm incomes why not for grains?"

So, to be clear, you want to raise the cost of grain-based foods. I’ll ask all those single parents I know and those on fixed incomes how they feel about that.

"So I take it you want GM wheat even when the majority of our customers don't want it? Why doesn't the US introduce GM wheat first? What are they waiting for? Did you learn anything from the flax fiasco?"

About GM anything – why do you think the industry would go for GM wheat when customers don’t want it? I was at the board meeting of the Canola Council of Canada when Monsanto proposed a closed loop system to do field test trials for GM canola. This was at a time when no canola customers wanted it. The focus quickly went to who is liable if some errant GM canola seeds found their way into the commercial system. Monsanto didn’t have a good answer. The reaction by the CCC board was swift and “expressive”. Under no uncertain terms were they about to sanction these trials. I was sure glad I wasn’t that Monsanto rep. Only once canola customers agree to GM canola did we go there. Same would happen with wheat.

[gregpet]

Ouch chucky, will be waiting for you r response to John.

By the way can you show me chuck where it states the the CWB madate is to maximize returns to
farmers? I remember a court case where the CWB said it was not to maximize prices for farmers. Do
you remembe that one chuck?

[Burbert]

In Comedia, our fiends in Viterra, just
bought a fuel supply business eSSO, er
Imperialist Oil. Wow two tired old
companies gettin together, to form a
bigger tired old company, that no one
will deal with. Watch out Oz, Viterra
is just starting to pull their bull and
show their true colors to yous. In
Comedia most farmers dislike their
business. Maybe ifn we's lucky they
move lock stock and barrel to Oz!

[craig]

Burbert
I was thinking of where you could move to to be with all your friends and was thinking Russia but then I remembered their agriculture is moving to free enterprise. Maybe you can go to Antartica and start what ever marketing system you want. You can extract premiums for whatever because you'll have a monopoly.